Official Engagements

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many days he spent in Wales on official business in each of the last 12 months.

Paul Murphy: Ministers and civil servants meet many people as part of the process of policy development and advice. It is not normal practice to disclose details of such meetings.

Official Engagements

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what his official engagements were in December 2007.

Paul Murphy: Ministers and civil servants meet many people as part of the process of policy development and advice. It is not normal practice to disclose details of such meetings.

Licensed Premises

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what estimate his Department has made of the number of licensed premises in England and Wales that have a terminal hour, on at least one day of the week, after 11 pm.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Department does not hold detailed information on the licensed hours of the 177,200 licences and certificates that were in force in England and Wales on 31 March 2007. The actual closing times of a premises may, in any case, be earlier than the terminal hours granted on its licence. Data from the on-licensed trade suggests that 60 per cent. of outlets stop selling alcohol by 11 pm and that, on average across all on-licensed premises, closing times have increased by approximately 20 minutes since the Licensing Act 2003 came into effect.

Olympic Games 2012: Finance

Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what payment is being made to Fast Track for the contract to help raise £100 million pounds from the private sector to help fund athletes in the run up to the 2012 Olympics in London.

Gerry Sutcliffe: The Department and UK Sport are currently in discussion with Fast Track about the contractual arrangements for the project to raise £100 million from the private sector.
	We do not expect that public funding will be used to pay for this project.

Afghanistan: Military Decorations

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the criteria are for award of the  (a) ISAF medal and  (b) Operational Service Medal for Afghanistan; for what reasons the ISAF medal may not be worn; and if he will make a statement.

Derek Twigg: For Afghanistan, the Operational Service Medal (OSM)—Afghanistan was instituted to recognise service in Afghanistan and in support of operations in that country from 11 September 2001. The qualifying criteria were initially published in Command Paper 5939 in September 2003 and amended in Command Paper 6935 in October 2006. Copies were placed in the Library of the House.
	Subsequently, NATO offered their ISAF medal to coalition troops taking part in NATO operations in Afghanistan from 1 June 2003. Qualification for the medal is completion of at least 30 days continuous or accumulated service.
	One of the key principles laid down by the Committee on the Grant of Honours, Decorations and Medals is that permission will not be given for UK citizens to accept a foreign award if they have received, or are expected to receive, a UK award for the same service.
	As the NATO medal now covers the same service as the national OSM—Afghanistan and thereby contravenes the 'double medalling' rule. UK personnel who are given the medal may retain it, but may not wear it.

Departmental ICT

Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many  (a) male and  (b) female members of staff in her Department were issued with personal digital assistants in each year since 2001; and if she will make a statement.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The following figures represent the number of personal digital assistants (PDAs) issued to male and female staff in the Department for Transport and Agencies for each year since the Department was set up in 2003:-
	
		
			   2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 (includes  08 to date)  Comments 
			   M  F  M  F  M  F  M  F  M  F  
			 DfT(C) 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 23 132 52 PDAs only officially issued from 2006 onwards 
			 DVLA 3  8  0  8  0  Cannot split between male and female as allocated to tams rather than individuals. 
			 HA 44 5 81 11 0 0 8 2 0 0 Figures are PDA current distribution - initial allocations not recorded 
			 DSA 15 3 0 0 0 0 3 2 2 0  
			 MCA n/a n/a 3 3 27 4 88 13 109 16 Figures are the position at the end of the year, which may vary from those originally issued, due to PDAs changing users. 
			 VOSA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  
			 VGA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  
			 GCDA 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 2 0 0 All now withdrawn for policy review. 
			 Totals (excludes DVLA) 59 8 84 14 27 4 157 42 243 68 Grand total = 706 plus 19 unallocated. 
		
	
	DfT policy is to provide personal digital assistants (PDAs) to appropriate staff where there are clear business benefits.

Motor Vehicles: Excise Duties

Robert Goodwill: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport 
	(1)  how many vehicles over 25 years of age pay vehicle excise duty for all or part of the year;
	(2)  how many vehicles have free historic vehicle tax discs.

Jim Fitzpatrick: The numbers of licensed vehicles over 25 years of age at the end of 2006 and registered in Great Britain were as follows:
	
		
			   Number of licensed vehicles (thousand) 
			 All vehicles 723 
			 Exempt from vehicle excise duty—historic vehicle 307 
			 Exempt from vehicle excise duty—other reasons 232 
			 Not exempt from vehicle excise duty 183 
		
	
	The data given above includes vehicles where the year of manufacture is not known.

Specialised Diplomas

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills what mechanisms he plans to employ to train teachers to prepare pupils studying for the new school diplomas; where he expects such training to be delivered; what organisations in the  (a) public and  (b) private sector he expects to deliver such training; and if he will make a statement.

David Lammy: My colleagues in the Department of Children, Schools and Families are providing a nationwide programme of free training and support to prepare staff in schools and further education (FE) colleges to teach the first five Diplomas and functional skills.
	This work is being delivered through eight partner organizations from the school and FE sectors. These are the national college of School Leadership (NCSL), the Centre for Excellence in Leadership (CEL), the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA), Lifelong Learning UK (LLUK), the Quality Improvement Agency (QIA), the Specialist Schools and Academies trust (SSAT), the National Assessment Agency (NAA) and the Secondary National Strategies (SNS).
	To prepare teachers and lecturers to deliver Diplomas, QIA and SSAT offer a three-day training package to all Diploma practitioners, which covers the Diploma model, employer engagement, and is developed in conjunction with Sector Skills Councils. The training events are delivered in a range of venues with at least one of the days delivered on site in a relevant occupational setting. The face-to-face training is supplemented by a range of electronic and hard copy materials and access to local teacher development networks.
	We are also working closely with the awarding bodies that will be offering diploma qualifications to ensure that their offer of support to schools and colleges complements this range of training.

Afghanistan: Capital Punishment

Denis MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make representations to the government of Afghanistan to stay the execution of the death sentence imposed on the journalist Sayed Parwez Kaambakhsh charged with insulting Islam.

Kim Howells: The Government were concerned to hear about the case of Sayed Pawez. We are opposed to the death penalty for any crime. We fully support the right to freedom of expression and the right to a fair trial. We are pursuing the matter in Afghanistan through the EU and UN. The office of the UN Special Representative in Afghanistan has already called publicly for a review of the case.

Uzbekistan: Human Rights

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment he has made of the human rights situation in Uzbekistan; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Murphy: The overall human rights situation in Uzbekistan remains bleak, although there have been some positive steps over the last 12 months. On 1 January 2008, Uzbekistan abolished the death penalty and introduced a limited form of 'habeas corpus'. The EU and Uzbekistan have established a human rights dialogue. These developments are outweighed, however, by continuing concerns in other areas. We continue to receive reports of violations of freedom of expression, religious freedom and the right to a fair trial. Civil society and the media remain under strict control. At least 14 human rights defenders are in prison; others suffer harassment and pressure that has forced some to leave Uzbekistan, or cease their activities. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office's 2008 Annual Human Rights Report contains a fuller analysis of the human rights situation in Uzbekistan.
	We repeatedly and regularly register our concerns about individual cases and the human rights situation in general with the Uzbek authorities, both bilaterally and with EU partners. In Tashkent, the EU discussed a range of human rights issues with senior representatives of the Uzbek Government at the first session of the EU-Uzbekistan Human Rights Dialogue in May 2007. In October 2007, EU Foreign Ministers called on Uzbekistan to demonstrate progress in key areas of human rights by May 2008. There will be another session of the dialogue in 2008 and a seminar on media freedom. The EU special representative for Central Asia, Pierre Morel, visits Uzbekistan regularly and raises human rights concerns with the Uzbek Government.
	Our embassy in Tashkent also maintains regular contact with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and activists throughout Uzbekistan. We have helped hon. Members to make contact with NGOs in Ukbekistan to work on human rights issues and have helped to develop the capacity of NGOs, including to report on human rights violations. We will continue to monitor the human rights situation in Uzbekistan and make our concerns clear through a critical, but constructive, dialogue with the authorities. In November 2007, we funded an NGO to attend the UN Committee on Torture's examination of Uzbekistan.

Departmental Records

Jo Swinson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer 
	(1)  what test of what constitutes reasonably required information under section 8 of the National Audit Act 1983 is carried out on data transferred from his Department to the National Audit Office;
	(2)  what safeguards are in place in his Department to prevent more information than is required by the National Audit Office being passed on for auditing purposes;
	(3)  which Acts of Parliament permit disclosure of information which is held by HM Revenue and Customs in accordance with section 18(3) of the Commissioners for Revenue and Customs Act 2005.

Jane Kennedy: Each request is judged on a case by case basis and the National Audit Office should provide a clear explanation of why they want to see particular data and limit requests to that data required to fulfil their audit responsibilities.
	For each audit HMRC appoint a senior official who has overall responsibility and is a designated contact point to oversee day to day activity, including enquiries and information requests.
	Following the child benefit data loss incident, HMRC have introduced more stringent data handling procedures, which require that the bulk transfers of customer data only take place with adequate security protection.
	For more detail on the changes made, I refer the hon. Member to Kieran Poynter's interim report that was published on 17 December 2007 and is available in the Library of the House.
	Various Acts of Parliament permit disclosure of HMRC information. I refer the hon. Member to HMRC's Information Disclosure Guidance manual at:
	http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/manuals/idgmanual/.

Inflation

Mark Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his Department issues advice to other Government departments on which inflation measure to use to uprate their items of revenue and expenditure.

Yvette Cooper: In general, it is the responsibility of individual Government Departments to determine the appropriate inflation measure to use in uprating items of revenue and expenditure although specific items will be discussed with Treasury as part of Treasury's role in controlling public expenditure (as set out in the Managing Public Money publication, available on the Treasury website).
	In respect of revenues, as stated in Managing Public Money fees, charges and levies should be reviewed regularly to achieve full cost recovery and are therefore based on actual costs rather than indexation.
	In respect of some of the more significant items of expenditure, the practices for uprating social security benefits administered by the Department of Work and Pensions can be found in Appendix A of 'The Abstract of Statistics for Benefits, National Insurance Contributions, and Indices of Prices and Earnings, 2006 Edition', published by the Department of Work and Pensions.

Motor Vehicles: Excise Duties

Robert Goodwill: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the annual cost to the Exchequer would be of restoring the exemption from vehicle excise duty for 25 year old vehicles.

Angela Eagle: Vehicles built before 1 January 1973 are eligible to be licensed as exempt from payment of vehicle excise duty provided they are not in commercial use.
	The number of vehicles over 25 years of age that are currently subject to payment of vehicle excise duty is 183,000. The most recently available licensing data does not completely disaggregate this number by applicable vehicle excise duty rate.
	An extension of the exemption would potentially affect cars, vans, motorcycles, motorised tricycles, buses and heavy goods vehicles across all vehicle excise rates excepting those for vehicles registered March 2001 onwards. However, it is not therefore possible to determine the cost to the Exchequer of extending the exemption.
	Further extension of the exemption for classic vehicles would be inconsistent with the Government's overall policy intent in vehicle excise duty which is to give rates an environmental focus.

Northern Rock: Fixed Costs

Philip Hammond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether all the monies lent by the Bank of England to Northern Rock plc and underwritten by HM Treasury are secured by a fixed charge over specific assets.

Angela Eagle: I refer the right hon. Gentlemen to the letters the Chancellor sent to the chairs of the Public Accounts Committee and the Treasury Select Committee on 11 October 2007, which are available in the House Library.

Children: Poverty

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when the Office of National Statistics plans to release the next set of statistics on child poverty in the UK.

Anne McGuire: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 10 January 2008,  Official Report, column 726W.
	The Office for National Statistics does not release statistics on child poverty in the UK.

Building Schools for the Future Programme

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what assessment he has made on the impact of the Building Schools for the Future project on the future budgets of  (a) schools and  (b) local authorities; and if he will make a statement.

Jim Knight: 21(st) century school buildings, built to current high quality and sustainability standards, should have lower running and maintenance costs than the unsuitable and time-expired buildings which they will replace. They will allow more resource s to be focused on the core activities of improving children's attainment and life chances.
	In addition, as part of the work undertaken for the initial pilot projects, the Department reviewed the funding for PFI projects to ensure that the contribution that local authorities and schools make to the unitary charge was affordable. This had the effect of increasing the level of support from central Government for PFI projects than was the case prior to BSF.

Education

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 16 January 2008,  Official Report, columns 1269-70W, on education, what the names are of the four unregistered settings referred to in the answer.

Jim Knight: The current registration requirements only apply to independent schools that offer full-time education. There is currently no requirement for part-time providers to register. As every child is entitled to full-time education, parents, local authorities or others will, where appropriate, need to supplement part-time provision to ensure that children receive their full education entitlement.
	There is currently no statutory definition of 'part-time' and 'full-time' education in terms of hours or days spent studying and we understand that the providers named as follows provide a large proportion, and in some cases all, of their pupils' education provision. We believe that settings where children receive a substantial proportion of their education should be regulated with a light touch, compared to schools in the maintained sector, while still ensuring that the premises are safe; all necessary personnel suitability checks are completed; appropriate child welfare arrangements are in place; and that children learn and make progress. We are confident that any good quality provision will meet the independent school standards as they are flexible enough to cover many different types of provision; there is no requirement to follow the national curriculum, or to employ teachers with qualified teacher status, for example.
	We have no comprehensive record of part-time providers of education. The responses to our consultation suggested that there are some settings we are unaware of that may need to register under current proposals. Before the new legislation comes into force, we will work with any institution that will need to register to ensure it is clear about our requirements and time scales.
	The four unregistered settings, in the same order as they appeared in my previous answer are as follows:
	Tyndale Academy;
	Headstart Learning Centre;
	The Children's Garden;
	Kid's Company.

General Certificate of Secondary Education

John Hayes: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what were the 10 subjects most frequently studied to GCSE level in each category of school in the last period for which figures are available; and how many students studied each subject.

Jim Knight: The following tables show the 10 subjects most studied to GCSE level in 2007 for each type of school. Numbers and percentages are provided. The overall figures for England are also included. National figures for all subjects can be found in the SFR "GCSE and Equivalent Examination Results in England 2006/07 (Revised)", available at:
	http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000768/index.shtml.
	
		
			  GCSE attempts and achievements( 1)  in selected subjects of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4( 2)  in schools (number), years: 2006/07( 3)  (Revised), coverage: England 
			Community School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 360,675 97 
			 2 English 356,159 96 
			 3 English Literature 294,772 80 
			 4 Double Award Science 255,995 69 
			 5 History 107,743 29 
			 6 Art and Design 107,229 29 
			 7 Geography 98,035 27 
			 8 Physical Education 93,794 25 
			 9 French 90,271 24 
			 10 Drama 59,578 16 
		
	
	
		
			Voluntary Aided School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 83,579 98 
			 2 English 83,085 98 
			 3 English Literature 71,981 85 
			 4 Religious Studies 62,959 74 
			 5 Double Award Science 60,038 71 
			 6 History 28,852 34 
			 7 French 28,532 34 
			 8 Geography 25,212 30 
			 9 Art and Design 22,505 26 
			 10 Physical Education 20,453 24 
		
	
	
		
			Voluntary Controlled School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 19,142 98 
			 2 English 18,983 98 
			 3 English Literature 16,725 86 
			 4 Double Award Science 13,960 72 
			 5 French 6,718 35 
			 6 History 6,018 31 
			 7 Art and Design 5,871 30 
			 8 Geography 5,721 29 
			 9 Physical Education 5,202 27 
			 10 Business Studies 3,510 18 
		
	
	
		
			Foundation School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 106,591 98 
			 2 English 105,895 98 
			 3 English Literature 91,998 85 
			 4 Double Award Science 74,413 69 
			 5 History 35,715 33 
			 6 French 33,681 31 
			 7 Geography 32,324 30 
			 8 Art and Design 31,425 29 
			 9 Physical Education 27,457 25 
			 10 Religious Studies 19,062 18 
		
	
	
		
			City Technology College 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 1,744 100 
			 2 English 1,743 100 
			 3 English Literature 1,596 92 
			 4 Double Award Science 770 44 
			 5 French 709 41 
			 6 History 622 36 
			 7 Geography 581 33 
			 8 Physical Education 480 28 
			 9 Business Studies 457 26 
			 10 Art and Design 427 25 
		
	
	
		
			Academy 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 6,141 96 
			 2 English 6,036 94 
			 3 English Literature 4,566 71 
			 4 Double Award Science 3,494 55 
			 5 Art and Design 1,530 24 
			 6 Single Award Science 1,361 21 
			 7 History 1,225 19 
			 8 Religious Studies 1,072 17 
			 9 Physical Education 1,033 16 
			 10 Geography 963 15 
		
	
	
		
			   Community Special School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 2,098 22 
			 2 Art and Design 1,421 15 
			 3 Single Award Science 1,281 13 
			 4 English 1,164 12 
			 5 D & T: Resistant Materials 294 3 
			 6 English Literature 218 2 
			 7 Drama 175 2 
			 8 Double Award Science 153 2 
			 9 Physical Education 135 1 
			 10 Information Technology(4) 128 1 
		
	
	
		
			Foundation Special School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 English 79 34 
			 2 Mathematics 54 23 
			 3 Single Award Science 48 21 
			 4 Art and Design 44 19 
			 5 English Literature 23 10 
			 6 Geography 23 10 
			 7 Drama 7 3 
			 8 Double Award Science (5)— (6)— 
			 9 N/A N/A N/A 
			 10 N/A N/A N/A 
		
	
	
		
			Non Maintained Special School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of  pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 247 39 
			 2 English 178 28 
			 3 Art and Design 172 27 
			 4 Single Award Science 145 23 
			 5 Double Award Science 64 10 
			 6 D & T: Resistant Materials 62 10 
			 7 English Literature 54 9 
			 8 French 54 9 
			 9 History 40 6 
			 10 Geography 25 4 
		
	
	
		
			Independent Special School 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of pupils attempting subject 
			 1 Mathematics 432 59 
			 2 English 363 50 
			 3 Single Award Science 235 32 
			 4 Art and Design 234 32 
			 5 D & T: Resistant Materials 147 20 
			 6 Double Award Science 145 20 
			 7 Geography 88 12 
			 8 English Literature 79 11 
			 9 Physical Education 65 9 
			 10 History 62 8 
		
	
	
		
			Independent Schools 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of pupils attempting subject 
			 1 English 43,506 93 
			 2 English Literature 40,066 86 
			 3 Mathematics 33,484 72 
			 4 French 28,778 62 
			 5 Double Award Science 25,583 55 
			 6 History 23,875 51 
			 7 Geography 21,858 47 
			 8 Biological Sciences 15,423 33 
			 9 Art and Design 15,003 32 
			 10 Chemistry 14,326 31 
		
	
	
		
			All Schools 
			   Subject  Number of attempts  Percentage of pupils attempting subject 
			 1 English 619,481 95 
			 2 Mathematics 616,890 95 
			 3 English Literature 522,446 80 
			 4 Double Award Science 434,779 67 
			 5 History 204,251 31 
			 6 French 189,740 29 
			 7 Art and Design 186,483 29 
			 8 Geography 184,978 28 
			 9 Physical Education 155,510 24 
			 10 Religious Studies 155,249 24 
			 (1) For each subject only one attempt is counted - that which achieved the highest grade. (2) Pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 in the 2006/07 academic year. (3) Includes attempts and achievements by these pupils in previous academic years. (4) Also includes Computer Studies, Information Systems and any combined syllabus of which Information Technology is the major part. (5) Less than 5 pupils. (6) Percentage based on a figure less than 5.

General Certificate of Secondary Education: Newcastle Upon Tyne

Jim Cousins: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what percentage of children at local education authority maintained schools gained GCSEs at grades A* to C, including English and mathematics in  (a) Newcastle upon Tyne Local Education Authority,  (b) England and  (c) each English region in each year since 1997.

Jim Knight: holding answer 22 January 2008
	The information on the number of pupils achieving five GCSEs or equivalent at grades A* to C, including English and mathematics are shown in the tables.
	The information is collected for the Statistical First Release 'GGSE and Equivalent Examination Results in England (Revised)' which is published annually and can be accessed at:
	http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000768/index.shtml
	
		
			  GCSE or equivalent results by local authority and government office region: 1997  to  2007 , n umber  and percentage of 15-year- olds gaining 5+ GCSEs or equivalent at grades A*- C including English and Maths 
			   1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002 
			  No.  %   No.  %   No.  %   No.  %   No.  %   No.  % 
			 Newcastle Upon Tyne 673 24.9 671 25.0 757 27.5 731 27.9 829 29.7 823 29.6 
			  
			 North East 8,758 28.0 8,642 28.4 9,433 30.8 10,026 32.9 10,684 33.6 11,030 34.8 
			 North West 25,718 32.2 26,128 32.9 28,378 35.1 29,477 36.7 30,907 36.8 32,259 38.4 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 16,765 28.8 17,023 29.9 18,220 31.6 19,228 33.2 20,076 33.6 21,067 34.9 
			 East Midlands 15,272 31.9 15,345 33.1 16,462 35.1 17,018 36.1 18,137 37.2 19,173 38.8 
			 West Midlands 18,493 30.1 18,994 31.2 20,966 33.8 21,530 35.1 22,864 35.8 23,950 37.5 
			 East of England 21,004 35.4 21,917 38.0 22,758 39.5 23,559 40.4 24,919 41.3 25,759 42.2 
			 Inner London 4,436 21.4 4,741 22.8 5,132 24.3 5,472 25.5 6,150 28.3 6,491 30.0 
			 Outer London 15,288 33.8 16,514 37.0 17,270 38.3 18,014 39.6 18,989 40.6 20,081 42.4 
			 London 19,724 29.9 21,255 32.4 22,402 33.9 23,486 35.1 25,139 36.7 26,572 38.5 
			 South East 30,883 37.2 31,066 38.9 33,254 40.9 34,052 42.1 36,388 43.1 37,428 44.1 
			 South West 18,373 36.1 19,123 37.9 19,927 39.4 20,771 40.8 22,131 41.7 23,225 43.2 
			  
			 England (Maintained Sector) 174,990 32.5 179,493 34.0 191,800 39.4 199,147 37.3 211,245 38.1 220,463 39.5 
		
	
	
		
			   2003  2004  2005  2006  2007 
			  No.  %   No.  %   No.  %   No.  %   No.  % 
			 Newcastle Upon Tyne 886 30.4 888 31.9 870 33.2 957 33.3 1,079 37.9 
			
			 North East 11,125 34.7 11,584 35.7 11,785 38.0 12,779 40.3 13,585 41.7 
			 North West 32,345 37.9 34,298 39.0 35,209 40.7 37,049 42.0 39,777 44.5 
			 Yorkshire and the Humber 21,611 35.0 23,006 36.5 24,114 39.0 25,357 40.2 27,077 42.3 
			 East Midlands 19,328 38.3 20,414 39.0 21,187 40.7 22,595 42.8 23,920 44.2 
			 West Midlands 24,266 37.2 25,435 38.1 26,741 40.3 28,095 41.5 29,651 43.1 
			 East of England 26,333 41.9 27,619 42.5 28,897 44.8 30,472 46.5 31,868 48.2 
			 Inner London 7,012 31.7 7,803 34.5 8,307 36.6 9,090 39.1 9,684 42.2 
			 Outer London 20,833 42.8 22,298 43.9 23,083 45.9 24,756 48.6 25,799 50.2 
			 London 27,845 39.3 30,101 41.0 31,390 43.0 33,846 45.6 35,483 47.7 
			 South East 39,329 44.7 40,693 42.3 41,947 46.3 43,652 47.6 45,313 49.2 
			 South West 23,781 42.8 25,313 43.6 26,090 45.4 26,763 46.0 27,289 47.0 
			
			 England (Maintained Sector) 225,963 42.8 238,463 40.4 247,360 46.7 260,608 43.9 273,963 45.7

Languages

Nick Gibb: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 6 March 2007,  Official Report, columns 1898-1902W, on languages, 
	(1)  at which maintained mainstream schools no pupils were entered for a GCSE in  (a) a modern foreign language,  (b) history and  (c) geography in 2006;
	(2)  how many 15-year-olds attended the maintained mainstream schools where no pupils were entered for a GCSE in  (a) a modern foreign language,  (b) history and  (c) geography in 2006.

Jim Knight: holding answer 14 January 2008
	Answers to these questions can be found in the columns to which Mr. Gibb refers.

Special Educational Needs

David Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of referred children received a provisional assessment of special educational needs statement within 18 weeks in each year since 1997, broken down by local authority; and if he will make a statement.

Kevin Brennan: Children may be referred to their local authority for a statutory assessment of special educational needs through: a request from their school or setting; a request from their parent; or a referral by another agency. The local authority must then decide whether to conduct an assessment based on the initial evidence provided. The Government do not hold data on the total number of children referred for a statutory assessment.
	Following a statutory assessment, the local authority must decide whether or not a child should receive a statement. The number of children in each local authority who receive a statutory assessment but do not receive a statement is recorded and is set out for each ear from 1998 below.
	The Audit Commission publishes figures on the proportion of draft statements issued by each local authority within 18 weeks of the start of the statutory assessment process. This information(1), broken down by local authority is available from
	http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk
	(1) Best Value Performance Indicator 43a and b give the proportion of draft statements issued within 18 weeks excluding and including the permitted exceptions to the time limits respectively since 2000-01. The proportion of draft statements issued within 18 weeks excluding exceptions was collected as indicator K12b from 1997-98 until 1999-2000 and as indicator K10b in 1996-97.

Teenage Pregnancies: Barnet

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the rate of teenage pregnancy in Barnet was  (a) in 1997 and  (b) in each of the last two years; what steps his Department is taking in relation to teenage pregnancies; and if he will make a statement.

Beverley Hughes: The number and rate of under-18 conceptions in Barnet for each year from 1997 to 2005 (the latest year for which data are available) are provided in the table as follows.
	
		
			   Number  Rate 
			 1997 171 30.2 
			 1998 137 24.2 
			 1999 162 28.9 
			 2000 154 27.9 
			 2001 143 25.4 
			 2002 192 34.1 
			 2003 177 31.3 
			 2004 203 35.4 
			 2005 167 29.0 
		
	
	The baseline year for the Teenage Pregnancy Strategy is 1998. Since the, the under-18 conception rate in Barnet has risen by 19.9 per cent. This is at odds with the trend in England as a whole—where the under-18 conception rate has fallen by 11.4 per cent.—and in contrast to areas that have similar population characteristics to Barnet, which have achieved impressive reductions. For example, the under-18 conception rate in Merton has fallen by 33 per cent.
	To tackle the wide variation in progress across England, we have issued guidance to local authorities and primary care trusts on the key ingredients of successful local strategies—based on evidence of what works from those local areas which have made most progress. This evidence identified that successful strategies need to have in place:
	Active engagement of all of the key mainstream delivery partners who have a role in reducing teenage pregnancies—Health, Education, Social Services and Youth Support Services—and the voluntary sector;
	A strong senior champion who is accountable for and has taken the lead in driving forward the local strategy;
	The availability of a well publicised young people-centred contraceptive and sexual health advice service, with a strong remit to undertake health promotion work, as well as delivering reactive services;
	A high priority given to PSHE in schools, with support from the local authority to develop comprehensive programmes of sex and relationships education (SRE) in all schools;
	A strong focus on targeted interventions with young people at greatest risk of teenage pregnancy, in particular with Looked After Children;
	The availability (and consistent take-up) of SRE training for professionals in partner organisations (such as Connexions Personal Advisers, Youth Workers and Social Workers) working with the most vulnerable young people; and
	A well resourced Youth Service, providing thing to do and places to go for young people, with a clear focus on addressing key social issues affecting young people, such as sexual health and substance misuse.
	I am asking areas like Barnet—where rates are either increasing or where progress is slow—to use this guidance to review and update their local strategies. This work is being supported by Government Offices who are providing appropriate support and challenge to each the local area. As part of that approach, we are encouraging all areas that are significantly behind trajectory to consider including teenage pregnancy as a priority in their Local Area Agreements that they are currently negotiating with Government Offices. The aim is to accelerate progress in all areas to the levels of the best—if all areas had performed as well as the top quartile, the national reduction would be 2 per cent. more than twice the reduction actually achieved.

Aerials: Health Hazards

John Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what her most recent assessment is of the health implications of siting mobile telephone masts in the vicinity of schools; on what information she bases that assessment; and if she will make a statement.

Iain Wright: The Government's planning policy on the siting of mobile telephone masts is set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications (PPG 8).
	The advice in PPG 8 is based on the report of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) which was published in 2000 and under the chairmanship of Sir William Stewart, considered concerns about health effects from the use of mobile phones, base stations and transmitters. The group did not recommend that base stations be prohibited on or near school grounds.
	In the Government's view if a proposed mobile phone base station meets the exposure guidelines set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), then it is not necessary to consider further the health aspects of the development.
	However, Planning Policy Guidance Note 8 on Telecommunications makes clear that, where it is proposed to install, alter or replace a mobile base station near a school or college, operators should consult the school or college concerned before submitting an application for planning permission or prior approval to the local authority. The local planning authority should also consult the relevant bodies, and should take into account any relevant views expressed.
	The network operators have agreed to provide schools, on request, with information on the level of intensity of radiofrequency radiation from a base station on or near their premises. In an ongoing audit, the Office of Communications (Ofcom) has now measured exposures around more than 500 base stations to date (www.ofcom.org.uk). In all cases exposures have been below, and mostly thousands of times below, the ICNIRP guidelines.
	In January 2004 the National Radiological Protection Board's (now the Health Protection Agency) Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR) carried out a detailed scientific review which was published in a report "Health Effects from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields". AGNIR examined more recent experimental and epidemiological evidence for health effects due to exposure to radiofrequency (RF) transmissions, including those associated with mobile telephone handsets and base stations. They also concluded
	"Exposure levels from living near to mobile base stations are extremely low and the overall evidence indicates that they are unlikely to pose a risk to health."

Building Regulations: Carbon Emissions

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what discussions her Department has had with colleagues in the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform on the  (a) next set of building regulations and  (b) long- term impact of moving towards a lower carbon grid;
	(2)  how the move towards a lower carbon grid through deployment of new nuclear, renewables and carbon capture and storage will be reflected in the setting of future building regulations;
	(3)  when the 2016 Taskforce plans to discuss the relationship between housing and energy policy with respect to heating from low carbon electricity as proposed in the 2007 Energy White Paper; and which heating industry representatives the Taskforce plans to invite to attend the meeting.

Iain Wright: Ministers and officials from Communities and Local Government have held regular discussions with colleagues from the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform on a range of strategic energy issues, including the future changes to the Building Regulations and the impact of moving towards a lower carbon grid.
	The 2016 Taskforce, whose members already include the Construction Products Association which in turn represent the heating industry, discuss high level strategic issues related to the zero carbon standard, including around energy supply. When appropriate, relevant sectors will be invited to attend the Taskforce meetings to participate in discussions.
	Building Regulations already take into account the carbon content of the grid. This is kept under regular review that will be continued as we move towards setting the zero carbon standard into Building Regulations from 2016.
	The "Building a Greener Future: policy statement" published on 23 July 2007 committed to developing the definition of zero carbon for the purposes of Building Regulations. This will involve a full consultation within a sensible time frame to allow the industry to adjust before the planned changes in 2016.

Fire Services

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what progress has been made on the proposed regional emergency control rooms for the fire service.

Parmjit Dhanda: holding answer 25 January 2008
	The FiReControl project has made substantial progress summarised as follows:
	Nine new designed-for-purpose buildings have been procured. Contracts to build the RCC buildings were let in 2006 and 2007, and construction is progressing to plan. Four buildings have already reached practical completion. A single contract to deliver facilities management services to all nine buildings will be let by CLG in April 2008;
	Procuring new technology: CLG let a contract in March 2007 to EADS Defence and Security Systems Ltd ("EADS") to deliver common, networked, IT systems for the nine regional control centres;
	FiReControl depends on a significant change management programme. Key developments include the establishment of six of the eight regional delivery companies with regional control centre directors and other senior staff appointed in five of them. Guidance has been developed with the fire and rescue services on organisation design, generic staffing model and terms and conditions of employment. These are currently being finalised and implemented by the Fire and Rescue Services in light of local circumstances. Design work to harmonise ways of working, operational procedures, processes and protocols to achieve interoperability between the 46 Fire and Rescue Service and the nine regional control centres has been completed. The alignment of these designs with the EADS solution prior to detailed planning and implementation by each of the Fire and Rescue Services is under way.

Fire Services: Finance

Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the estimated budgets for the regional emergency control centres for the fire service are; what the original estimated budgets were; and how much was allocated to UK fire services in total for 2007-08.

Parmjit Dhanda: holding answer 25 January 2008
	The current estimated cost of implementing FiReControl in England is approximately £360 million (in 2007-08 prices). The original estimated costs (at 2004-05 prices) was £264 million in England. We are currently forecasting to fund £19 million in 2007-08 of transitional costs in implementing FiReControl in England. The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland assemblies have responsibility for the Fire and Rescue Service in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Green Belt: Planning

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what her Department's definition of green space is for  (a) mapping and  (b) planning purposes.

Iain Wright: At present, there is no formal definition of green space used by Communities and Local Government for either mapping or planning purposes. Although open space is defined in the Town and Country Planning Act as land laid out as a public garden, or used for the purposes of public recreation, or land which is a disused burial ground, this narrow definition is not considered appropriate for dealing with the complete range of open spaces, including green spaces, that exist and the variety of functions they can fulfil.
	The Government's planning policies on open space are set out in planning policy guidance note 17 (PPG17) "Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation (2002)". PPG17 makes it clear that these policies should be applied to all types of open space that have public value. An illustrative typology of open spaces which may be of public value, which includes a variety of different types of green space, is included in the annex to PPG17. Communities and Local Government will shortly be developing a green space database web resource that will provide information on green space as maps.

Home Information Packs

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 21 January 2008,  Official Report, column 1526W, on home information packs, if she will place in the Library copies of those pages of the Lenders' Handbook which list the mortgage lenders' policies on the acceptance of personal searches.

Iain Wright: The Council of Mortgage Lenders "Lenders Handbook" is not a published document but is available at www.cml.org.uk

Homelessness: Exservicemen

Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many homeless households have been accepted as being in priority need under the category of A person who is vulnerable as a result of having been a member of Her Majesty's regular naval, military or air forces in each year since its introduction in the Homelessness (Priority Need for Accommodation) (England) Order 2002.

Iain Wright: Information about local authorities' action under homelessness legislation is collected quarterly at local authority level and includes the number of households accepted by local authorities as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in priority need, and therefore owed a main homelessness duty. The duty owed to an accepted household is to secure suitable accommodation.
	The yearly total number of households accepted as being eligible, unintentionally homeless and in priority need, as well as those having a priority need primarily due to being vulnerable as a result of having served in HM forces, is shown in the following table.
	
		
			  Year  Total acceptances  O f which :  primary priority need ex-HM forces 
			 2003/04 135,430 104 
			 2004/05 120,860 95 
			 2005/06 93,980 73 
			 2006/07 73,360 53 
		
	
	It is important to note that some former HM forces personnel accepted as homeless may be included within other primary priority need categories (e.g. when the household includes dependent children), and so will not feature in the figures above. Tables showing acceptances broken down by the main priority need categories are published quarterly in the Statistical Release on Statutory Homelessness and placed in the House Library.

Housing Statistics 2007

Mark Harper: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government when she plans to publish the Housing Statistics for 2007.

Iain Wright: Housing Statistics 2007 is due to be published on 7 February 2008.

Housing: Construction

David Willetts: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many  (a) one bedroom,  (b) two bedroom,  (c) three bedroom,  (d) four bedroom and  (e) five bedroom or more houses have been built in each of the last 10 years.

Iain Wright: The proportions of new build completions in England by number of bedrooms and dwelling type are in the following table. The information is presented as proportions not absolute numbers because number of bedrooms and dwelling type is collected centrally for only about half of the new build activity.
	
		
			  Percentage 
			   1997-98  1998-99  1999-2000  2000-01  2001-02  2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			  Houses   
			 1 bedroom 1 1 1 1 (1)— 1 (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— 
			 2 bedrooms 19 18 17 15 11 10 9 8 8 8 
			 3 bedrooms 37 35 34 32 28 29 28 27 26 25 
			 4 or more 28 30 31 32 37 34 30 23 20 20 
			
			 Flats   
			 1 bedroom 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 10 10 11 
			 2 bedrooms 7 9 10 12 15 19 24 30 35 35 
			 3 bedrooms 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 
			 4 or more (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— (1)— 
			
			  Houses and flats   
			 1 bedroom 7 7 7 7 7 6 8 10 10 11 
			 2 bedrooms 27 27 26 27 25 29 33 38 42 42 
			 3 bedrooms 38 36 35 34 31 30 29 28 27 27 
			 4 or more 28 30 32 32 37 34 30 23 21 20 
			 All 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 
			
			 Total completions 149,555 140,708 142,046 133,255 129,866 137,739 143,958 155,893 163,398 167,577 
			 (1) zero or less than 0.5 per cent.  Source:  National House Building Council and P2 house building return from local authorities. 
		
	
	.

Housing: Greater London

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much the Government received in capital receipts from housing-related asset sales  (a) in total and  (b) from right-to-buy sales from each London borough in 2005-06.

Iain Wright: The following table indicates the amount each London borough, through the process of pooling—the mechanism by which all local authority housing capital receipts are recycled for investment—paid to the Secretary of State out of its receipts arising from the sales in 2005-06 of its housing land. It is currently not possible for the equivalent information to be provided separately for the authorities' Right to Buy (RTB) receipts, other than at disproportionate cost, although the vast majority of pooled receipts are RTB receipts.
	
		
			  Authority  Amount of 2005-06 receipts pooled (£) 
			 Barking and Dagenham 7,279,477.82 
			 Barnet 2,219,658.71 
			 Bexley 59,494.34 
			 Brent 5,429,513.25 
			 Bromley 44,921.64 
			 Camden 14,568,265.25 
			 Croydon (1)3,401,304.20 
			 Ealing 3,803,426.54 
			 Enfield 5,006,055.76 
			 Greenwich 9,424,531.40 
			 Hackney (1)15,287,746.48 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham 10,851,088.14 
			 Haringey 17,468,536.16 
			 Harrow 3,461,781.46 
			 Havering 5,101,710.10 
			 Hillingdon 6,976,263.95 
			 Hounslow 3,720,159.93 
			 Islington 23,772,005.71 
			 Kensington and Chelsea 2,167,877.18 
			 Kingston-upon-Thames 1,638,774.07 
			 Lambeth (1)21,998,515.45 
			 Lewisham 21,590,177.83 
			 London (City of) (1)150,334.97 
			 Merton 4,189,867.41 
			 Newham 16,047,318.73 
			 Redbridge 4,552,107.00 
			 Richmond-upon-Thames 69,836.77 
			 Southwark (1)54,586,305.06 
			 Sutton 1,083,309.30 
			 Tower Hamlets 32,138,314.54 
			 Waltham Forest 4,436,539.31 
			 Wandsworth 10,218,059.94 
			 Westminster 6,191,108.32 
			 Total (1)318,934,386.72 
			 (1) The figures for these five authorities are provisional, so the total figure is provisional as well.

Housing: Low Incomes

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many housing association tenants there are in England; how many have the  (a) full and  (b) preserved right to buy; and how many are likely to qualify for the right to acquire scheme.

Iain Wright: There are 1.873 million housing association tenants in England. Approximately, 28,000 (i.e. 1.5 per cent.) are secure tenants of non-charitable housing associations who have  (a) the right to buy. Another one million tenants (i.e. 53 per cent.), who transferred with their homes from local authorities since 1988, have retained  (b) a preserved right to buy.
	In addition, over 188,000 housing association tenants (i.e. 10 per cent.) may qualify for (c) the right to acquire because their homes have been built with public funds since 1 April 1997.
	Some of the tenants of the 871, 241 homes which have transferred from local authorities to housing associations since 1 April 1997 may also qualify for the right to acquire scheme.

Housing: Low Incomes

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will place in the Library a copy of the  (a) Brian Pomery review of shared equity and  (b) evaluation of Social Homebuy scheme research completed in December 2007.

Iain Wright: The Government appointed Brian Pomery to help them follow up on the shared equity task force report and advise on ways to develop the private sector shared equity market. The work is ongoing.
	The evaluation report of the Social HomeBuy scheme is expected shortly and will be published in due course.

Infrastructure Planning Commission

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the planned yearly cost to the public purse is of the new  (a) Infrastructure Planning Commission and  (b) Homes and Communities Agency.

Iain Wright: The costs of the Homes and Communities Agency are set out in the Housing and Regeneration Bill—Impact Assessment. This states that the one-off cost of setting up the Homes and Communities Agency will be £20 million over three years and the average annual cost of the Agency from 2009 will be approximately £17 million per annum. However, the average annual benefit to the public purse anticipated for the period 2007-08 to 2013-14 is £193.7 million per annum. This will be gained from more streamlined working, simpler delivery chains, a more strategic approach to operations, a single identity of a national housing and regeneration agency, harnessing scarce skills and increased negotiating skills for procurement.
	The costs of the Infrastructure Planning Commission are set out in the Planning Bill—Impact Assessment. This states that the one-off cost of setting up the IPC will be £5 million. Our intention is that the administrative running costs of the IPC will be met through fees from applicants, and not from the public purse; and the fact that the IPC will examine cases instead of Ministers will mean savings to central Government of £0.6 million per annum and to the Planning Inspectorate of £0.3 million per annum.

INTERREG Programme

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what role her Department is playing in the implementation of the European Union's  (a) INTERREG IVA,  (b) INTERREG IVB and  (c) INTERREG IVC programmes; and what form of control system is being put in place to monitor the outcomes for each.

John Healey: My Department has been involved in the development of all three INTERREG programmes through leading the UK representation on working groups overseeing their preparation and agreeing the priorities.
	The draft IVA programmes were submitted to the European Commission in mid November and should be implemented by May 2008.
	The IVB and IVC programmes have been approved. My Department's officials, with their regional colleagues, are representatives on the Monitoring and Steering Committees which decide the content and direction of the programmes as well as project selection.
	The Managing, Certifying and Audit Authorities for each of these programmes are responsible for ensuring that the management and control arrangements comply with European Commission regulations. None of these authorities are based in the UK.

Leadership Centre for Local Government: Finance

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding was provided by the public purse to the Leadership Centre for Local Government in each year since its creation; and what the annual budget is for the next three years.

John Healey: The Leadership Centre for local government was set up in July 2004 following extensive discussion with the Local Government Association and other level government bodies to improve the quality of leadership in local government. £2 million was paid to the centre in 2004-05; £4.465 million in 2005-06; £3.267 million in 2006-07 and £3.267 million in 2007-08.
	For the CSR07 spending round (2008-11), £2 million annually has been set-aside to continue the work of the Leadership Centre.

Local Authorities: Data Protection

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance has been given to local authorities on the processing of personal data outside the European Economic Area, either directly or via contractors.

John Healey: It is the responsibility of the local authorities to seek their own advice, including from the Information Commissioner and his website, regarding their legitimate processing of personal data. The Information Commissioner provides detailed guidance on the processing of personal data outside the European Economic Area, either directly or via contractors in two pieces of guidance on his website: 'International Transfers of Personal Data'
	http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_ protection/practical_application/generic_guidance_ international_transfers_v2.pdf
	and 'The Eighth Data Protection Principle and international transfers'
	http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_ protection/detailed_specialist_guides/international_ transfers_legal_guidance_v2.0_300606.pdf
	Communities and Local Government does not directly provide guidance to local authorities on issues concerning the Data Protection Act 1998.

Local Authorities: Disclosure of Information

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar of 10 December 2007,  Official Report, column 147W, on local authorities: disclosure of information, if she will place in the Library a copy of the guidance issued to the regional assemblies in March 2006.

John Healey: I have arranged for copies of 'Guidance on the General Principles of Designation of Voluntary Regional Assemblies' issued in March 2006, to be placed in the Library of the House.

Local Government Finance

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what changes to Government policy on local government finance will follow from the signing of the new Central-Local concordat.

John Healey: The concordat sets out the areas we will be looking to develop with local government and such work is under way. It reaffirms our commitment to deliver greater flexibility for local authorities to take decisions on their own funding priorities, and over the next three years we are moving around £5.6 billion into general grants which are not ring-fenced. We have undertaken to work with local government to provide greater clarity and transparency to local people on the levels of public funding going into local areas, and we have delivered the first three year settlement for each council.

Local Government: Planning

Brian H Donohoe: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many local government enforcement orders on planning issues have been successfully enforced since 1996.

Iain Wright: Statistical information on different types of enforcement action by local planning authorities is published in Development Control Statistics, England 2006-07 available on the Department's website
	www.communities.gov.uk/planningandbuilding/planning statistics/developmentcontrolstatistics/.
	However, we do not hold centrally or publish information about the outcomes of such action. The Planning Inspectorate publish information about appeals against enforcement notices and their outcomes on their website.
	www.planning-inspectorate.gov.uk.

Local Government: Reorganisation

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many councillors will each of the restructured local authorities have; and how many councillors in total across both tiers will the council areas have in each case.

John Healey: The number of councillors if restructuring is implemented, in the five areas for which draft Implementation Orders have been laid before Parliament, is as follows:
	
		
			  Local authority  Number of councillors 1 April 2009 
			 Cornwall county 82 
			 Durham county 126 
			 Northumberland county 67 
			 Shropshire county 48 
			 Wiltshire county 49 
			 Grand total 372 
		
	
	A new unitary councils number of councillors may change at the first election held after the Boundary Committee has undertaken a review of the council's electoral arrangements.

Local Government: Reorganisation

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which local authorities undergoing restructuring will have elections for the new council in  (a) 2008 and  (b) 2009; and in which year in each case parish council elections will take place.

John Healey: Under restructuring orders, which we have laid before the House, the first elections to the new unitary authorities will be in 2008, in the case of the unitary County Durham and Northumberland councils, and in 2009, in the case of the new unitary Cornwall, Shropshire and Wiltshire councils; in all five cases subsequent elections will be in 2013.
	Parish elections in those areas will be held in future on the same cycle as elections for the new unitary councils; as a result, some parishes will hold elections in 2009, but the majority will be moved from 2011 to 2013.

Local Government: Standards

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether local authorities will be set local improvement targets via the new  (a) local area agreements and  (b) multi-area agreements.

John Healey: Upper tier and unitary local authorities will be required to determine local improvement targets when directed by the Secretary of State to prepare a local area agreement ("LAA") under section 106 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. Once they have been determined in a draft LAA, the LAA will be submitted to the Secretary of State for her approval in accordance with section 107 of that Act. It is expected that all such authorities will therefore set local improvement targets in LAAs.
	Unlike LAAs, multi-area agreements do not have a statutory basis. Any outcomes in an MAA are not local improvement targets, unless they are drawn from the relevant LAAs.

Mortgages: First Time Buyers

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many and what proportion of first-time buyers in England took out mortgages of 100 per cent. or more of the purchase price of the property in the most recent period for which figures are available.

Iain Wright: Data on first time buyers (FTBs) using a mortgage is available from the regulated mortgage survey which is supplied to Communities and Local Government by the Council of Mortgage Lenders. However, as the survey is a sample, data on the number of FTBs for England is unavailable. However we can derive proportions.
	For 2006, based on figures from the regulated mortgage survey, Communities and Local Government estimate that 8.3 per cent. of mortgages to first time buyers (excluding sitting tenants) in England were for 100 per cent. or more of the purchase price of the property.

Multiple Occupation: Licensing

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what steps she is taking to coordinate best practice in the implementation of the national licensing scheme for houses in multiple occupation.

Iain Wright: The Department has funded Local Authorities Co-ordinators of Regulatory Services (LACORS) to support local housing authorities in England and Wales in implementing mandatory licensing of houses of multiple occupation (HMOs). LACORS issues guidance, advice, and coordinates and disseminates best practice in relation to regulation of private sector housing.

Parish Councils: Cost Effectiveness

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government whether she plans to abolish grants for best value compliance to parish councils.

John Healey: Section 136 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 removes parish councils from the duty of best value. Paragraph 3 of Schedule 7 to the 2007 Act removes the Secretary of State's power to make grants to parish councils in respect to their costs of complying with best value. We intend to commence both provisions with effect from 1 April 2008.

Parking: Planning

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will  (a) direct or  (b) encourage local planning authorities to revise local plan policies on parking standards in light of the changes on parking standards in planning policy statement three and the repeal of Planning Policy Guidance 3.

Iain Wright: Planning Policy Statement three "Housing" (PPS3) does not prescribe car parking standards for new residential development. Rather, it introduced a more flexible approach to the local provision of car parking by giving local planning authorities the ability to set their own residential parking policies, taking account of expected levels of car ownership, the importance of promoting good design and the need to use land efficiently.
	The policies in PPS3, including that relating to car parking provision for new residential development, should be taken into account by local planning authorities in the preparation of their local development frameworks. They should also be regarded as material considerations in determining planning applications for new housing development which may supersede the policies in existing development plans.

Planning: Public Participation

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar of 10 December 2007,  Official Report, columns 148-49W, on planning: public participation, if she will place in the Library a copy of each substantive response to the Planning White Paper, excluding campaign write-in submissions.

Iain Wright: Copies of the substantive responses listed in the Planning White Paper Consultation: Government response to consultation replies have not been placed in the Library because of the volume we received. They are available for inspection at Communities and Local Government.

Planning: Retail Trade

Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the Answer to the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar of 10 December 2007,  Official Report, column 149W, on planning: retail trade, what representations she has received from supermarkets in the revision of Planning Policy Statement 6 since May 2007.

Iain Wright: I refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract and Castleford (Yvette Cooper) to the hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove) on 29 October 2007,  Official Report, column 149W, which set out the written representations the Secretary of State (or her officials) has had from supermarkets up to 15 June 2007.
	Since then, the Secretary of State (or her officials) has received written representations from the following supermarkets in relation to the proposed revisions to Planning Policy Statement 6, as announced in the Planning White Paper "Planning for a Sustainable Future" which was published in May 2007:
	Asda*
	John Lewis Partnership/Waitrose*
	Lidl
	Marks and Spencer
	Musgrave GB
	Tesco
	Supermarkets who have asked that their representations remain confidential are indicated by '*'. Copies of other representations have been placed in the Library of the House.

Regeneration: Greater Manchester

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for South-West Surrey (Mr. Hunt), of 11 December 2007,  Official Report, columns 554-5W, on regeneration: Greater Manchester, what the terms of reference are for the review of regeneration alternatives to the regional casino in Manchester; and whether the review will consider  (a) the option of eight small and eight large casinos and  (b) the effect of the increase in the number of casinos authorised under the Gaming Act 1968 prior to the implementation of the Gambling Act 2005.

John Healey: In July, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said that the Government would look at whether deprived areas could be equally well served by other forms of regeneration than the development of regional casinos.
	While Manchester will clearly have an interest in the findings of the review, the response is not specific to alternatives to a regional casino in Manchester—it applies to deprived areas more broadly.
	The Review did not look at the case of the small or large casinos or consider the Gambling Act more generally. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport is currently considering next steps on casino policy under the Gambling Act 2005, and will make an announcement to Parliament in due course.

Regeneration: Greater Manchester

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for South-West Surrey (Mr. Hunt) of 11 December 2007,  Official Report, columns 554-5W, on regeneration: Greater Manchester, and to the answer of 17 December 2007,  Official Report, column 1131W, on casinos, whether the review of regeneration alternatives to regional casinos has received evidence from representatives of  (a) Anschutz Entertainment Group,  (b) its associated companies and  (c) business partners.

John Healey: In July the Prime Minister said that the Government would consider the question of whether deprived areas could be equally well served by other forms of regeneration than the development of regional casinos. While Manchester will clearly have an interest in the findings of the review, the response is not specific to alternatives to a regional casino in Manchester—it applies to deprived areas more broadly.
	There is no record that the Review received any evidence from Anschutz Entertainment Group nor any party known to me to be its associated company or business partner. When the Review is published it will list the evidence sources that have been referenced.

Regional Planning and Development

Eric Pickles: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 17 December 2007,  Official Report, columns 1157-8W, on regional planning and development, whether a Secretary of State's decision to require the draft Local Area Agreement to be amended may be imposed on local councils against their advice.

John Healey: Section 107(1) of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 allows the Secretary of State to require the amendment of a draft Local Area Agreement, but does not specify the considerations that might affect such a decision.
	The Government Office will be expected to resolve any difficulties earlier in the negotiation, reducing the likelihood that the draft LAA will need to be re-drafted. This is emphasised at sections 4.17 to 4.18 of the draft statutory guidance: "Creating Strong, Safe and Prosperous Communities", available on the CLG website at:
	http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/local government/statutoryguidance

Sheltered Housing: Finance

Peter Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 
	(1)  what funding was made available to local authorities for sheltered accommodation with a residential warden in each of the last five years;
	(2)  what the Government's policy is on  (a) the removal of residential wardens and  (b) replacement of residential wardens by mobile wardens in relation to sheltered accommodation.

Iain Wright: Local authorities provide funding for housing related support services such as those included in sheltered housing accommodation through the supporting people programme grants allocated to them by the Government. Supporting people is a grant programme administered through top tier authorities which enables over one million vulnerable people each year to live independently in their home and community.
	However, decisions about how support services for sheltered housing are provided and how the allocated grant funding is used, are made by each local authority, in accordance with their local needs and priorities and as identified in their supporting people five year strategies.
	The supporting people funding allocated to local authorities relates to the total supporting people grant covering all types of housing related support and not just sheltered housing with a residential warden. Therefore figures are not collected which would show funding for sheltered accommodation with a residential warden in each of the last five years.
	As mentioned, the decisions as to how much of the total allocation is spent on sheltered housing with a residential warden or any other kind of support services are for local authorities to determine.
	As part of it's national affordable housing programme, the Housing Corporation has funded through social housing grant, accommodation designated or designed for older people, but as with supporting people grant, does not specify how support services should be delivered within specially designated or designed housing for older people, and is therefore unable to identify how many of these will have a residential warden.

Supporting People Programme

Daniel Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance has been given to local authorities on the extent of the financial assessment which should be undertaken when considering whether individuals receiving long-term support under the Supporting People programme are eligible to pay charges; and whether individual's debts and monthly outgoings should be taken into account.

Iain Wright: holding answer 25 January 2008
	 The Department has issued guidance ("Supporting People (England) Directions 2007/08") which states that each administrating authority is required to set out in their Supporting People strategy the rules for charging of service recipients, which must include:
	(i) the circumstances in which there is to be relief from charges;
	(ii) the process for making an application for relief
	(iii) the rules for determining the relevant date of application; and
	(iv) details of the review mechanism which is to apply where a service recipient disputes any decision under the charging rules.

Wardens

Bob Neill: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government pursuant to the answer of 12 December 2007,  Official Report, column 685W, on wardens, what central funding has been provided to fund neighbourhood warden schemes, further to the pledge in the Respect Action Plan.

John Healey: For 2006-07 and 2007-08 £92.9 million of the Safer Stronger Communities Fund was paid through the local area agreement (LAA) grant. Under LAAs local authorities and their partners have flexibility to decide how they spent their funds to deliver agreed LAA outcomes.
	From 2008-09 onwards £67.1 million of the Safer Stronger Communities Fund will be paid as a contribution to the new area based grant, a non ring-fenced general grant for local authorities. This will provide local authorities with even greater flexibility over how they spend their funding. The fund has been allocated to authorities in recognition of their need to improve public satisfaction with local areas which could include promoting warden schemes. However it will be up to individual authorities to decide how they spend their area based grant allocations.

Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust: Crimes of Violence

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many cases of assault there were against members of staff from the Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust in 2007; and what the prosecution rates were in these cases.

Ann Keen: Data on reported physical assaults is collected each year for the period 1 April to 31 March.
	The number of reported physical assaults against staff at Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS trust for the period 2006-07 was 137.
	Information on prosecutions rates in these cases is not held centrally and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Abortion: Freedom of Information

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 14 January 2008,  Official Report, column 984W, on the Abortion (Amendment) Bill of Session 1979-80, for what reasons two files were destroyed; what the  (a) prefix and  (b) title of these files was; what criteria are used by his Department on reviewing files; and if he will make a statement.

Dawn Primarolo: File E/A0223/251/vB—"Draft and Notes and clauses—Abortion Amendment Bill" was destroyed in 2005. File E/A0223/191—"Abortion Act 1967 John Corners Abortion Amendment Bill" was destroyed 2004. Both files were destroyed following a second review of the contents, 25 years after the files were started.
	The criteria used in respect of these files were set out in the Manual of Records Administration published by the then Public Record Office.

Ambulance Services: Standards

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what national targets exist for the handover times from ambulances to accident and emergency departments.

Ben Bradshaw: Departmental guidance makes clear that under normal operational circumstances handovers should take no longer than 15 minutes. This is guidance, not a target or a standard. While the Department recognises there may be periods when operational pressures mean this is not always possible, trusts should ensure their escalation plans include robust action to manage their handovers.

Anaesthetics: Training

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many anaesthetic training posts in categories  (a) ST1,  (b) ST2,  (c) ST3 and  (d) SPR will be vacant on the first Wednesday of February 2008 in (i) England, (ii) London and (iii) Kent, Surrey and Sussex.

Ann Keen: This information is not collated centrally.
	Postgraduate Deaneries are now recruiting doctors to take up specialty training programmes from August 2008. Information regarding the numbers of posts being appointed to can be found on the Modernising Medical Careers website at:
	www.mmc.nhs.uk.

Bournemouth and Christchurch Primary Care Trust: Finance

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 14 January 2008,  Official Report, column 986W, on Bournemouth and Christchurch primary care trust: finance to the hon. Member for Bournemouth East, for which other trusts specialist top-up payments have been discontinued in 2008-09; and how much each trust received in such payments in  (a) 2007-08 and  (b) 2006-07.

Ben Bradshaw: Specialist top-ups are payable across nine areas of treatment. In 2007-08, all hospitals were eligible for specialist top-ups where they had provided these services. In 2008-09, all providers are still eligible for specialist top-ups for non-specialised children, colorectal and orthopaedic activity. The list of providers eligible for all other specialist top-ups was published within the national tariff on 13 December 2007. Copies of the list have been placed in the Library.
	In addition, strategic health authorities have the flexibility to agree the payment of specialist top-ups to a wider range of providers than those on the list, where a commissioner can make a compelling case for inclusion.
	Data are not collected centrally on how much each trust received in specialist top-ups.

Cancer: Health Services

Cheryl Gillan: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what public funding has been made available for extending the 31-day standard target to all cancer patients; and what the expected total cost is of such an extension.

Ann Keen: An impact assessment was published at the same time as the new Cancer Reform Strategy (CRS) on 3 December 2007. A copy of the CRS Impact Assessment is available at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsLegislation/DH_081004
	and is also available in the Library.
	A breakdown of estimated additional costs associated with the extension of the 31-day standard is detailed in the following table:
	
		
			  Cost of 31-day standard for all cancer treatments 
			  Financial year  Estimate for annual costs (£ million) 
			 2008-09 2.1 
			 2009-10 4.3 
			 2010-11 6.4 
			 2011-12 6.4 
			 2012-13 6.4 
			 2013-14 6.4 
			 2014-15 6.4 
			 2015-16 6.4 
			 2016-17 6.4 
			 2017-18 6.4 
		
	
	Funding for the extension of the 31-day standard is not separately identified in allocations to the national health service. Primary care trusts are funded to meet the health care needs of their populations, which will include the provision of cancer services.

Carbon Monoxide

Tom Levitt: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to raise awareness of medical practitioners of the risks to health of carbon monoxide and the symptoms, diagnosis and consequences of carbon monoxide poisoning.

Dawn Primarolo: The Department is committed to help prevent deaths and injuries caused by carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning and raise awareness of the dangers of CO poisoning among the public and medical profession. A range of specific actions to achieve this have been and continue to be taken, many of which are specific to medical practitioners.
	In his winter update issued in November 2007, which is sent to all doctors registered with the General Medical Council in England, the chief medical officer (CMO) (Liam Donaldson) provides a range of advice on diagnosis of CO poisoning, including the use of neurological examination.
	This builds on two previous publications, the advice of which is still current: "CMO Winter 2005 Update"; and the CMO and chief nursing officer (CNO) joint letter issued in 2002. CMO's update includes recognition of the symptoms of CO poisoning, key questions to ask in diagnosis, appropriate tests and treatment. The CMO/CNO letter, distributed to community nurses, midwives, health visitors and general practitioners, provides detailed advice for recognising the symptoms of CO poisoning and specific advice about investigations and testing techniques.
	In addition, the Department has recently called for research to investigate the incidence of CO poisoning, health outcomes and patient's experience following exposure, which will help inform the development of appropriate policy.
	The Department also provides funding to leading national voluntary organisations through the Section 64 General Scheme of Grants, which helps in their work in raising awareness about the dangers of CO with both the public and health professionals and in supporting victims and providing information on how to prevent poisoning.
	In collaboration with key stakeholders, the Department is currently looking at options for new awareness-raising initiatives as well as reviewing activities in which it is already engaged.

Community Nurses

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 14 January 2007,  Official Report, column 1003W, on community nurses, how many more community matrons the local intelligence suggests there are; and what revised estimate he has made of total numbers.

Ann Keen: Strategic health authorities have suggested that the actual figure for community matrons may be higher than the official figure shown in the national health service work force census. The latest official figure still stands at 366 (351 full-time equivalent) as shown in the 2006 NHS work force census, the 2007 census is due to be published mid March 2008 and this will provide a more up to date figure.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to paragraph 6.4 of his Department's resource accounts for 2006-07, if he will break down his Department's £128 million revenue underspend on central programmes by programme; and what the reasons were for the underspend on each programme.

Ben Bradshaw: The following table gives a breakdown of the Department's £128 million revenue underspend as stated paragraph 6.4 of the 2006-07 Resource Accounts.
	
		
			  Budget  £ million  £ million  Reasons for under/(over)spend 
			 Demand Led
			 European Economic Area (health costs of United Kingdom citizens abroad) 53 — — 
			 Welfare Foods 8 — — 
			 Family Health Services Dentistry 4 — — 
			 Pharmacy -23 — — 
			 Total Demand Led budgets  42 Demand led budgets—difficult to accurately predict volume of activity/cost 
			 Technical/Provisions — —  
			 2005-06 Accounting Adjustments 20  As part of the year end review of balance sheet codes a number of adjustments were made. These included the reduction to zero of some creditors no longer required in respect of Deposits and Advances, £3.6 million, and health authority impairments £10.9 million. In addition following a review of Partnership for Health published accounts a credit of £5.750 million was made to expenditure in respect of an investment in Partnerships for Health charged incorrectly to operating expenditure in 2005-06. 
			 Skipton Fund (Hepatitis C compensation claims) 14 — Level of provisions dependent upon expected level of claims, which was lower than forecast. 
			 Ex-Regional Health Authority Retirements 11 — Review of methodology and assumptions for calculating provisions resulted in an underspend against budget. 
			 National Specialist Commissioning Advisory Group 7 — Review of accounting methodology to bring treatment in line with National Health Service resulted in an underspend against budget. 
			 English National Board provisions 4 — Review of methodology and assumptions for calculating provisions resulted in an underspend against budget. 
			 Injury Benefits -69 — Review of methodology and assumptions for calculating provisions resulted in an overspend against budget. 
			   -13  
			 Other Underspends — —  
			 Arms Length Bodies 63 — Underspend due to, in the main, revision of NHS Blood and Transplant corporate strategy, and lower than expected 
			requirements for transition costs funding. 
			 Payment by Results 6 —  
			 Personal Social Services (PSS) Regulation 5 — £2.5 million due to delays in expansion of domiciliary workers and £2.5 million on various other social care budgets. 
			 Healthy Choices 5 — Replanning of website development activity. 
			 Communications 4 — Value for money achieved through cheaper advertising. 
			 Individual Budget Pilots 2 — Replanning of new PSS Grant in year. 
			 Other underspends 14 — Several small variances on many small budgets including £1.5 million arising from exchange rate movements on World Health Organisation budget, £1 million on PSS Grants budgets (dependent upon receipt of valid invoices). 
			  — 99 — 
			  —   
			 Total Central Programme Underspend — 128 —

Departmental Recruitment

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether the policy of British jobs for British workers will affect his Department's recruitment policy for junior doctors.

Ann Keen: The choice facing us and the medical profession is whether we accept international medical graduates displacing large numbers of United Kingdom graduates, preventing them from obtaining postgraduate training, or whether we maximise the opportunities for UK medical graduates and the taxpayers' investment in them.
	Our preference is to give priority to UK and European economic area medical graduates. We were disappointed with the Court of Appeal judgment which ruled that the Department's guidance which had this effect was unlawful.
	We have been given expedited leave to appeal to the House of Lords against the Appeal Court judgment. The House of Lords will hear our appeal on the 28 February and we continue to examine ways to prioritise specialty training places for UK graduates.

Doctors: Career Structure

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Government have taken to improve the Medical Training Application System in the last 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: The Medical Training Application System (MTAS) was closed to applicants for specialist training posts in May 2007, although it remained accessible to Deaneries after that time for monitoring and statistical purposes. This followed two security breaches to the system.
	Improvements were then made to the security following which the Communications Electronic Security Group the national technical authority for information assurance, confirmed that appropriate and sufficiently comprehensive action had been taken.
	A national information technology-based (IT) application system is used for applications to the foundation programme for junior doctors. It was used for recruitment in 2007 and is being used again this year.
	Decisions about whether a national IT-based system is used for recruitment to specialty training for junior doctors will be the subject of extensive discussion with the medical profession and other key stakeholders.

General Practitioners: Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Government are taking to improve the GP to patient ratio in the Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS Trust in 2008; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: Barking and Dagenham Primary Care Trust (PCT) and Havering PCT have both been identified as falling under the 25 per cent. of PCTs with poorest provision and will therefore receive additional investment from the £250 million access fund for new general practitioner (GP) practices and a GP-led health centre. These new services will increase capacity in places that need it most and offer a range of innovative services such as extended opening hours and wider practice boundaries.
	Redbridge PCT is ranked 57th nationally and therefore falls outside of the 25 per cent. Like every PCT, Redbridge, Barking and Dagenham, and Havering will all be procuring one new GP-led health centre each.

General Practitioners: Yorkshire and Humberside

Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many GPs were in practice in Beverley and Holderness constituency in each of the last 10 years; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: The following table shows general medical practitioners (GMPs) (excluding retainers and registrars)(1) by specified area, as at 1997 to 2006.
	
		
			  GMPs (excluding retainers and registrars)( 1)  by specified area, as at 1997 to 2006 
			  Number (headcount) 
			   1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006 
			 General practitioners (GPs)(1) 309 307 307 306 315 313 332 325 344 346 
			
			 East Riding of Yorkshire PCT n/a n/a n/a n/a 168 171 186 179 190 190 
			 Hull PCT n/a n/a n/a n/a 147 142 146 146 154 156 
			
			 East Riding and Hull HA 309 307 307 306 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 
			 n/a = data not available (1) GMPs (excluding retainers and registrars) includes GP Providers and GP Others  Notes: 1. Data as at 1 October 1997-99, 30 September 2000-06. 2. Data presented for organisations in existence in the specified years. 3. Beverley and Holderness constituency is contained within East Riding of Yorkshire PCT and previously to this East Riding and Hull HA. 4. Hull PCT has been added for comparability purposes  Source: The Information Centre for health and social care General and Personal Medical Services Statistics 
		
	
	Work force planning is a matter for local national health service organisations as they are best placed to assess the health needs of their local health community. The NHS Plan target of 2,000 more GPs over the 1999 baseline was achieved in 2004. There are now more GPs in the NHS than ever before. This reflects the Government's record investment in primary care and commitment to expanding the GP work force.

Hospital Wards: Gender

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  by what date his Department expects to have collected data from NHS trusts on their completion of the self-assessment checklist on privacy and dignity issued by the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement in December 2007;
	(2)  if he will place in the Library a copy of the full report of focus groups and interviews which is summarised on page 7 of Privacy and Dignity—The elimination of mixed sex accommodation, issued by the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement in December 2007.

Ann Keen: Ensuring patients' dignity and privacy while they are in hospital is very important. The operating framework for 2008-09 confirms mixed-sex accommodation as a local priority. It requires primary care trusts to review performance with all trusts, and to agree, publish and implement stretching local plans to deliver improvements.
	The Government fully support the good practice guide produced by the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement. It provides practical information and examples of good practice to help trusts make best use of facilities in order to ensure patients are treated with the utmost privacy and dignity. The guidance is designed to be used internally within trusts and there are no plans to centrally collect or publish these data.
	The report of focus groups and interviews is currently being prepared for publication by Ipsos MORI. It will be available during February and will be placed in the Library at that point.

Hospital Wards: Mobile Phones

Mark Todd: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he has taken advice on the application of the Children's Act 2004 and the Human Rights Act 1998 to the use of mobile telephones with cameras in hospital wards.

Ben Bradshaw: The Department issued revised good practice guidance to the national health service on the use of mobile telephones in health care premises in May 2007. The revised guidance offers a legal framework and an evidence base for trusts to use in compiling their own policy on the use of mobile phones on health care premises and makes specific reference to the provisions of the Children Act 2004 and the Human Rights Act 1998.
	The guidance entitled "Using mobile phones in NHS hospitals" is available in the Library and is also on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_074396
	Guidance to the NHS on the use of mobile telephones on health care premises is kept under review.

Hospitals: Admissions

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what arrangements are in place on a  (a) national,  (b) regional and  (c) local scale to share information on available hospital beds in circumstances of significant emergencies.

Dawn Primarolo: As category 1 responders, national health service trusts have a duty to ensure an appropriate response to major incidents under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004. The arrangements should enable a co-ordinated response regardless of the nature or scale of the incident.
	Every hospital has major incident plans in place to make beds available if requested in the event of an emergency. This is co-ordinated at a local or regional level via established command and control systems (Gold ,Silver and Bronze). In an exceptionally large emergency this will be co-ordinated nationally across larger geographic areas by the Department's major incident co-ordination centre, which acts as a focal point of liaison and co-ordination between NHS gold structures.

Hospitals: Cleaning Services

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health for what average length of time hospital wards which have been deep cleaned have been out of use during deep cleaning.

Ann Keen: The details and timetable of each trust's deep clean plan will vary according to local need and the configuration of local services. In addition, not all deep cleaning requires closure of wards and trusts will have organised their programmes in order to minimise disruption to services and inconvenience to patients.
	I refer the hon. Member to the written ministerial statement given on 17 January 2008,  Official Report, columns 38-39WS. Further information on the implementation of the deep clean of the NHS is available from strategic health authorities.

Hospitals: Cleaning Services

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health from which budget the £50 million for deep cleaning hospitals has been allocated.

Ann Keen: Funding for deep cleaning hospitals has been allocated from strategic health authority budgets. I refer the hon. Member to the written ministerial statement given by the Secretary of State (Alan Johnson) on 21 November 2007,  Official Report, columns 134-35WS.

Hospitals: Vetting

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations he has received on delays in making appointments for hospital jobs following changes made to the Criminal Records Bureau fast track checking systems; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: The Department is not aware of any representations being made regarding issues in making appointments for hospital jobs following changes made to the Criminal Records Bureau fast track checking systems.

In-patient Management Programme

Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what costs have been identified in the inpatient management programme for cancer services, as outlined in the impact assessment of the cancer reform strategy.

Ann Keen: holding answer 24 January 2008
	The Cancer Services Collaborative Improvement Partnership and the cancer action team are developing the inpatient management programme to encourage and support local implementation of the programme.
	The programme will initially focus on providing support and guidance on service improvement for different categories of patients, such as patients admitted electively for surgery or chemotherapy and patients admitted as an emergency who are subsequently diagnosed with cancer.
	For the first five years of the programme, the costs have been identified as:
	
		
			   Cost in (£ million) 
			 2008-09 35.9 
			 2009-10 61.5 
			 2010-11 102.4 
			 2011-12 153.9 
			 2012-13 225.2 
		
	
	The bulk of these costs are for treatment provided outside of inpatient settings as a result of avoiding or reducing lengths of stay, such as community rehabilitation/care, additional monitoring/treatment and ambulatory care, but also include costs for programme management and monitoring.
	However, overall, the programme will result in both improved experiences for patients and significant cost reductions. For example, if a 25 per cent. reduction in non-surgical admissions for cancer were achieved across the country, estimates suggest this would result in a £340 million reduction in costs.

Junior Doctors: Greater London

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many newly trained junior doctors were employed in  (a) Greater London,  (b) Essex and  (c) Queen's Hospital, Romford in the last 12 months.

Ann Keen: The information is not available in the format requested. The following table shows the number of doctors in the first year of employment, compared to the total number in training at all trusts within National Health Service London, the five NHS trusts in the Essex area, and at the Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust, of which Queen's Hospital Romford is a part, on 30 September 2006.
	
		
			All doctors in training  House officer and foundation programme year one( 1) 
			 Greater London London Strategic Health Authority(2) 10,633 815 
			 
			 Essex Basildon and Thurrock University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust 154 30 
			  Essex Rivers Healthcare NHS Trust 184 28 
			  Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust 200 30 
			  Princess Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust 162 27 
			  Southend Hospital NHS Trust 198 30 
			 
			 Queen's Hospital, Romford Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust 419 47 
			 (1) The position of House Officer is currently being phased out and will soon be replaced entirely by foundation programme year one. (2) London Strategic Health Authority (SHA) does not map precisely over the county boundaries of Greater London.  Source: The Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Census 
		
	
	The numbers of doctors that the NHS requires to be recruited each year is a matter for determination by local NHS organisations, as they are best placed to assess the health needs of their local health community.

Medical Profession

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of  (a) nurses,  (b) midwives and  (c) doctors were working in the NHS three years after they qualified in each year since 1997.

Ann Keen: The Department does not collect centrally information on how many nurses, midwives or doctors were working in the national health service three years after they qualified in each year since 1997.
	The Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA) Destination of Leavers Survey asks United Kingdom and European Union-based graduates about their employment circumstances six months after graduation.
	The percentage of newly-qualified nurses and midwives (combined) and doctors between 2003 and 2006 inclusive who found employment in their chosen profession six months after graduation is shown in the following tables.
	
		
			  Employment circumstances of graduates six months after successfully completing a pre-registration course in nursing or midwifery, England 
			  Number (headcount) and percentage 
			   2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Academic year of graduation  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			 Number of survey respondents(1) 9,210 — 10,309 — 10,066 — 11,427 — 
			  O f which: 
			 Employed as a nurse or midwife 8,391 91.1 9,443 91.6 9,202 91.4 9,974 87.3 
			 Employed in other healthcare-related profession 102 1.1 122 1.2 131 1.3 225 2.0 
			 Employed elsewhere 151 1.6 141 1.4 127 1.3 260 2.3 
			 Unemployed 418 4.5 453 4.4 453 4.5 770 6.7 
			 Unknown 148 1.6 150 1.5 153 1.5 198 1.7 
			 (1) The survey response rates for nursing and midwifery graduates were as follows: 2002-03: 72 per cent., 2003-04: 74 per cent., 2004-05: 74 per cent., 2005-06: 76 per cent.  Note: HESA Destination of Leavers Survey asks UK- and EU-based graduates about their employment circumstances approximately six months after graduation.  Sources: HESA Destination of Leavers from Higher Education Survey The Information Centre for health and social care Student Database 
		
	
	
		
			  Employment circumstances of graduates six months after successfully completing a pre-registration course in medicine, England 
			   2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06 
			  Academic year of graduation  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage  Number  Percentage 
			 Number of survey respondents(1) 3,118 — 3,398 — 3,544 — 4,135 — 
			  of which: 
			 Employed as a doctor 2,855 91.6 3,152 92.8% 3,214 90.7 3,743 90.5 
			 Employed in other healthcare-related profession 3 0.1 5 0.1 7 0.2 12 0.3 
			 Employed elsewhere 12 0.4 13 0.4 17 0.5 15 0.4 
			 Unemployed 234 7.5 219 6.4 284 8.0 309 7.5 
			 Unknown 14 0.4 9 0.3 22 0.6 56 1.4 
			 (1) The survey response rates for graduates in medicine were as follows: 2002-03: 89 per cent., 2003-04: 91 per cent., 2004-05: 89 per cent., 2005-06: 93 per cent.  Note The HESA Destination of Leavers Survey asks UK- and EU-based graduates about their employment circumstances approximately six months after graduation.  Sources: HESA Destination of Leavers from Higher Education Survey The Information Centre for health and social care Student Database

Mental Health

Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether he plans to extend  (a) mental illness and  (b) learning difficulties training programmes for GPs and community care staff.

Ann Keen: The educational and training curricula of general practitioners (GPs), is set and managed by the Royal College of General Practitioners. The content of the GP training curriculum is agreed by the Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board (PMETB). PMETB has recently approved a new curriculum for postgraduate general practice training.
	Post-registration training needs for national health service staff are determined against local NHS priorities, through appraisal processes and training needs analyses informed by local delivery plans and the needs of the service.

NHS: Screening

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the number of people who will be screened for  (a) heart disease,  (b) stroke,  (c) diabetes,  (d) kidney disease and  (e) aortic aneurysm in each of the next three years in each primary care trust.

Ann Keen: The Department is currently developing proposals for a screening programme. The purpose of the screening programme will be to identify people's levels of risk for cardiac and vascular disease so that they can be offered preventive measures.
	The number of people who will be screened are, by their nature, unpredictable and will depend on the details of what is offered to whom, which will be worked out in part in discussions with stakeholders. However, a range of assumptions about likely take-up levels of a vascular risk assessment programme will be modelled into the analytical work being undertaken by the Department. Assumptions about likely take-up will also form part of the discussions we will have with stakeholders about the development of the practical aspects of the programme.
	With regard to screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm, information on estimated numbers of people who will be screened is not collected centrally.

NHS: Screening

Mark Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans his Department has to encourage high risk groups to access screening for  (a) heart disease,  (b) stroke,  (c) diabetes,  (d) kidney disease and  (e) aortic aneurysm.

Ann Keen: The Department is currently developing proposals for a screening programme. Any such programme will use an assessment of risk based on a range of known predictive factors including age, gender, smoking status, body mass index, high blood pressure, and cholesterol and glucose, as appropriate. The exact nature of a vascular risk assessment and management programme is still the subject of developmental work. It would be premature at this stage to set out specific details on advertising and education campaigns.
	With regard to screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), a variety of information and support materials will be developed with stakeholders to enable men to make an informed choice about whether they wish to undergo AAA screening or possible surgery if an AAA is detected.

NHS: Standards

Peter Bottomley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the impact on trusts' 18 week targets and two week cancer treatment times of service and training post vacancies.

Ann Keen: Service transformation, supported by the significant increase in the workforce since 1997, new ways of working and productivity gains, will enable 18 weeks and the cancer treatment times to be delivered and sustained.

Nurses: Manpower

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many matrons were employed in the NHS in each year since 1997-98.

Ann Keen: Modern matrons were identified separately for the first time in the 2005 annual National Health Service workforce census. Community matrons were identified separately for the first time in the 2006 annual NHS Workforce census. The number of both modern and community matrons employed is shown in the following table:
	
		
			  England as at 30 September each year 
			  Headcount 
			   2004  2005 ( 1) 2006 
			 Qualified nursing, midwifery and health visiting staff 375,371 381,257 374,538 
			 Modern matron — 1,606 1,982 
			 Community matron — — 366 
			 (1) More accurate validation in 2006 has resulted in 9,858 duplicate records being identified and removed from the non-medical census. Although this represents less than 1 per cent. of total records, it should be taken into consideration when making historical comparisons. These 9,858 duplicate records, broken down by main staff group, are: 3,370 qualified nurses; 1,818 qualified scientific, therapeutic and technical staff; 2,719 support to doctors and nurses; 368 support to scientific, therapeutic and technical staff; 1,562 NHS infrastructure support; and 21 in other areas.

Patients: Safety

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what incident types are used for entries in the National Reporting and Learning System in England and Wales.

Ann Keen: The current version of the National Patient Safety Agency's National Reporting and Learning System dataset comprises 15 categories of incident type.
	The 15 categories are:
	access, admission, transfer, discharge (including missing patient);
	clinical assessment (including diagnosis, scans, tests, assessments);
	consent, communication, confidentiality;
	disruptive, aggressive behaviour;
	documentation (including records, identification);
	implementation of care and ongoing monitoring/review;
	infection Control Incident;
	infrastructure (including staffing, facilities, environment);
	medical device/equipment;
	medication;
	patient abuse (by staff/third party);
	patient accident;
	self-harming behaviour;
	treatment, procedure; and
	other.

Primary Care Trusts

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what data his Department collects from primary care trusts on hospital at night teams.

Ann Keen: The Department does not collect information from primary care trusts on Hospital at Night (H@N) teams. However, we are aware that the H@N team in National Workforce Projects (NWP) has surveyed trusts.
	In the baseline survey of acute trusts, completed in October 2006. 65 per cent. of respondents had completed an audit and identified key competencies needed for their H@N team, and over half of the trusts used the National Patient Safety Agency guide to do their risk assessment. This report can be found on NWP's website at:
	www.healthcareworkforce.nhs.uk/working_time_directive/wtd_projects/baseline_report.html

Primary Care Trusts: Pay

Stephen Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average annual salary is of a primary care trust (PCT) chief executive in England; what the average was in  (a) 2001 and  (b) 2005; how many PCT chief executives received bonuses in (i) 2001 and (ii) 2005; and what the total value of such bonuses in each year was.

Ann Keen: The Department does not collect details on the pay of individuals in primary care trusts (PCTs), we therefore cannot provide the average salary of their chief executives. National health service organisations are public bodies and as such, the pay of their senior executive teams is a matter of public record, published in their annual accounts.
	Following the reconfigurations proposed by "Commissioning A Patient-led NHS", in July 2006 the Department published a new "Pay Framework for very senior managers in strategic and special health authorities, primary care trusts and ambulance trusts", a copy is available on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4137432
	PCT chief executives are paid a spot rate salary which is determined (within a range) by the size of the population the PCT serves. The document was updated in July 2007 and is available in the Library and on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_076986
	The current spot rate salaries are shown in the following table. The framework also provides for the payment of recruitment and retention premia (of up to 30 per cent. of the spot rate salary) and payments for additional duties (up to 10 per cent. of the spot rate salary) where appropriate.
	
		
			  Spot rates for PCT chief executives in 2007-08 
			   Weighted population  Salary from 1 April 2007  (£) 
			 Band one Up to 150,000 101,504 
			 Band two 150-300,000 112,211 
			 Band three 300-500,000 122,897 
			 Band four 500,000-1 million 133,584 
			 Band five Over 1 million 144,271 
		
	
	In 2001, PCTs were still being established and there were no nationally set rates for the pay of their chief executives.
	For information, the arrangements for the pay of their chief executives were formalised from 2002 with the publication of "Shifting the Balance of Power: a framework for benchmarking PCT Chief Executive salaries". A copy is available on the Department's website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4083023
	
		
			  Salary ranges for PCT chief executives in 2002-03 
			  £ 
			  Population served  Minimum  Midpoint  Maximum 
			 Up to 150,000 78,625 85,000 91,375 
			 150-300,000 87,875 95,000 102,125 
			 300-500,000 92,500 100,000 107,500 
		
	
	The Department issued guidance on pay ranges and each year notified the NHS of the maximum increase in the pay envelope for senior executive staff. Pay increases awarded to individuals may have varied as long as organisations limited the total pay envelope for this staff group to the maximum set by the Department. For the period 2002 to 2005, these were:
	
		
			   Percentage 
			 2003-04 3.225 
			 2004-05 3.225 
			 2005-06 3.225 
		
	
	By applying these annual uplift levels to the salary ranges published in 2002, an estimate of typical salary levels can be made:
	
		
			  Typical salary ranges for PCT chief executives in 2005-06—estimated 
			  £ 
			  Population served  Minimum  Midpoint  Maximum 
			 Up to 150,000 86,480 93,492 100,504 
			 150-300,000 96,654 104,491 112,328 
			 300-500,000 101,741 109,990 118,240 
		
	
	Prior to 2006, PCT chief executives were on local contracts. Although in some cases individuals may have been awarded performance related awards, there were no national arrangements in place for the payment of bonuses to PCT chief executives.
	Performance awards were introduced for all PCT chief executives as part of the "Very Senior Managers' Pay Framework" published in July 2006.

Queens Hospital Romford: Doctors

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many consultants were working at Queen's Hospital, Romford in the most recent period for which figures are available; and what steps the Government is taking to increase the number.

Ann Keen: The information requested is held at national health service trust only, and is therefore provided for Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust, of which Queen's hospital, Romford is a part. September 2006 is the most recent period for which data is available.
	
		
			  Hospital and community health services: medical and dental consultants working within Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust( 1)  as at 30 September 2006 
			   Consultant (Number, headcount) 
			 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust 216 
			 (1) Queens hospital, Romford is contained within this Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust.  Note: Data only available at trust level.  Source: The Information Centre for health and social care Medical and Dental Workforce Census. 
		
	
	There were 32,874 consultants counted in the 2006 census that is 10,500 (49 per cent.) more consultants working in the national health service than there were in 1997. The number of training opportunities is reviewed regularly. However, this is a matter for determination by individual NHS organisations. Forecasts show increasing demand for consultants, with around 2,500 more consultants employed by 2010-11. This reaffirms the Government's commitment to having more specialist doctors overall.

Review Group

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to paragraph 39, page 37 of his Department's resource accounts for 2006-07, what the dates were of each meeting held by the Review Group led by Professor Neil Douglas; and if he will place in the Library a copy of the  (a) agenda and  (b) minutes of each meeting.

Ann Keen: The group led by Neil Douglas was asked to:
	understand what has worked and not worked to date (March 2007);
	identify and promote good practice;
	recommend action to remedy any weaknesses, taking account of legal and operational constraints;
	identify specifically what further action or guidance is required:
	immediately (or before completion of round one);
	before commencement of round two;
	before and subsequent rounds; and
	develop improved arrangements for the support and care of applicants.
	The Department accepted and acted upon recommendations as they were made and the report of the review team can be found at:
	www.mmc.nhs.uk
	Meetings were held on 16 March, 21 March, 26 March, 30 March, 4 April, 17 April, 26 April, 9 May, 17 May, 24 May, 5 June and 28 June. They took place at a critical stage in the development of policy and it therefore would not be appropriate to publish the agenda and minutes of them. In addition, as the meetings began nearly a year ago, they may be misleading in the context of a rapidly-changing environment.

Screening

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health 
	(1)  pursuant to the answer of 15 January 2008,  Official Report, column 1194W, on screening, what estimates he has made of the cost of the screening programme in each future financial year for which estimates have been made;
	(2)  how frequently people will be screened under the programme;
	(3)  on what date the right to screening for  (a) heart disease,  (b) kidney disease,  (c) stroke and  (d) diabetes will be implemented (i) for the most vulnerable groups and (ii) for the whole population.

Ann Keen: The Prime Minister announced on 7 January that proposals were under development for a vascular risk programme. A departmental project is currently under way to assess the costs and benefits of an integrated, systematic population-wide vascular risk screening programme.
	We have a piece of modelling work in train which will develop the evidence base on which to construct an integrated approach to vascular risk assessment. The work will include estimating the amount of preventive work currently carried out by general practitioner surgeries and the impact of the introduction of a vascular screening programme.
	The exact nature of a vascular risk assessment and management programme, including details of operations time scales for implementing the programme and determining the frequency of screening individuals, is still the subject of developmental work.

Screening

Andrew Lansley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the answer of 15 January 2008,  Official Report, column 1194W, on screening, what preventative measures will be offered if people are found to be at risk through screening.

Ann Keen: The Prime Minister announced on 7 January that proposals were under development for a vascular risk programme. A departmental project is currently under way to assess the costs and benefits of an integrated, systematic population-wide vascular risk screening programme.
	Clear guidelines already exist for the management of identified risk in relation to cardiovascular disease, diabetes and heart disease. These can be found in the CHD, Diabetes and Renal National Service Frameworks, the National Stroke Strategy, and various relevant pieces of guidance from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE).
	NICE continues to ensure that updated guidance is available to the clinical community.

Speech Therapy: Barnet

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many speech therapists are employed by the NHS in Barnet; how many there were in 1997; what the estimated shortfall is of numbers of speech therapists in Barnet; what the average waiting time for a first appointment to see a speech therapist in Barnet was on the latest date for which figures are available; what steps he is taking to improve the provision of speech therapy in Barnet; and if he will make a statement.

Ann Keen: It is for primary care trusts in partnership with local stakeholders to determine how best to use their funds to meet national and local priorities for improving health, and to commission services accordingly. This process provides the means for addressing local needs within the health community, including the provision of speech and language therapy (SLT).
	Information about waiting times for SLT provided by the national health service are not collected centrally. The Department collects waiting times information by consultant led specialties. SLT is not a consultant led speciality. Our objective is to balance the need for data against the burden that data collection places on the NHS.
	There are 6,623 SLTs working in the NHS (NHS staff census September 2006—headcount), an increase of 36 per cent. since 1997. The number of SLTs entering training has increased by 65 per cent. since 1998-99.

Terminal Care

Tony Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to extend the Marie Curie Delivering Choice programme for terminally-ill people to parts of the country not currently served by it.

Ann Keen: We are supportive of Marie Curie Cancer Care's Delivering Choice programme, which provides a good example of the ways in which charities can work with the statutory sector to deliver quality care and patient choice. We are in discussion with Marie Curie on how we can further support the programme, but decisions on whether to fund local programmes remains the responsibility of primary care trusts.

Treatment Centres

Norman Lamb: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will publish performance information for each operational independent sector treatment centre.

Ben Bradshaw: The Department published information as shown in the following tables on each wave one independent sector treatment centre (ISTC) scheme, including the contract value, volume of activity, case mix by volume and utilisation rates on 15 November. This is also available on the Departments website at:
	www.dh.gov.uk/en/Policyandguidance/Organisationpolicy/Secondarycare/Treatmentcentres/index.htm
	
		
			  ISTC Phase 1 contractual information (as at end of September 2007-08) 
			  Contract  Location  Hospital name  Interim site commencement  Full service commencement  Total nominal contract value  (£ million)  Contract utilisation to date  (30-09-07) (Percentage)  Total contracted diagnostics 
			 LP2 Bradford Eccleshill NHS Treatment Centre — 1 April 2005 37.3 81 88,583 
			 LP3 Burton Midlands NHS Treatment Centre — 10 July 2006 77.4 74 — 
			 LP4 Trent and South Yorkshire Barlborough NHS Treatment Centre — 1 April 2005 96.7 89 — 
			 LP5 Daventry The Birkdale Clinic — 1 October 2003 4.9 97 — 
			 LP7 Shepton Mallet Shepton Mallet NHS Treatment Centre — 1 July 2005 110.3 95 — 
			 LP8 Greater Manchester Greater Manchester Surgical Centre — 19 May 2005 89.5 67 — 
			 LP9 Plymouth Peninsula NHS Treatment Centre — 3 May 2005 58.3 102 — 
			 GC4* East Cornwall Bodmin NHS Treatment Centre 1 October 2005 1 January 2006 24.9 56 — 
			 GC4 East Lincolnshire Boston NHS Treatment Centre — 20 April 2005 9.1 79 2,259 
			 GC4 North East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire Clifton Park NHS Treatment Centre 1 April 2005 25 January 2006 41.3 81 — 
			 GC4 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear The Cobalt NHS Treatment Centre — 25 May 2005 10.3 81 — 
			 GC4 West Lincolnshire Gainsborough NHS Treatment Centre — 1 April 2005 6.1 80 200 
			 GC4 Southampton Capio New Hall Hospital NHS Treatment Centre — 1 April 2005 41.8 72 — 
			 GC4* North Oxford Horton NHS Treatment Centre — 1 August 2006 79.2 51 — 
			 GC4* Thames Valley (Milton Keynes) Blakelands NHS Treatment Centre 1 April 2005 3 July 2006 12.1 58 — 
			 GC4 Thames Valley (Reading) Capio Reading Hospital NHS Treatment Centre — 1 April 2005 14.5 92 — 
			 GC5E Nottingham Nottingham NHS Treatment Centre at QMC — Site in Mobilisation 201.5 n/a — 
			 GC5W Cheshire and Merseyside Cheshire and Merseyside NHS Treatment Centre — 1 June 2006 111.0 100 — 
			 GC5W Kidderminster Kidderminster NHS Treatment Centre — 1 February 2005 26.9 87 — 
			 GC6 Maidstone Mid Kent NHS Treatment Centre — 6 November 2006 36.5 101 — 
			 GC7 North East London North East London NHS Treatment Centre — 1 January 2007 107.9 80 — 
			 GC8 Brighton Sussex Orthopaedic NHS Treatment Centre — 1 June 2006 100.9 101 — 
			 GC8 Havant TBC — Site in Mobilisation 6.4 n/a 78,600 
			 GC8* Medway Will Adams NHS — 1 October 2005 26.6 48 — 
			 GC8 Portsmouth St. Mary's NHS Treatment Centre — 19 December 2005 65.3 60 48,546 
			 GC8 Wycombe Mid and South Buckinghamshire NHS — 1 August 2005 10.6 82 74,880 
			 OC123 Ophthalmic Chain — — 25 January 2004 41.6 79 — 
			 
			  Contractual total — — — 1,448.91 — 293,068 
			  ISTC utilisation to date — — — — 84 — 
		
	
	
		
			Total contracted procedures broken down by health resource group (HRG) chapter 
			  Contract  Location  Total contracted procedures  General surgery  Orthopaedics  Nervous system  Ophthalmology  ENT 
			 LP2 Bradford 28,564 4,703 4,530 — 407 1,015 
			 LP3 Burton 64,814 6,673 11,908 6,168 16,477 3,590 
			 LP4 Trent and South Yorkshire 21,449 — 21,449 — — — 
			 LP5 Daventry 5,155 144 392 319 3,841 217 
			 LP7 Shepton Mallet 56,242 2,000 22,242 — 12,000 — 
			 LP8 Greater Manchester 44,863 5,782 20,667 — — 14,351 
			 LP9 Plymouth 16,512 — 16,512 — — — 
			 GC4* East Cornwall 26,495 215 40 — 7,148 — 
			 GC4 East Lincolnshire 6,955 572 — — 3,401 — 
			 GC4 North East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire 8,638 581 7,621 — — — 
			 GC4 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear 9,551 2,221 — — — — 
			 GC4 West Lincolnshire 5,647 447 996 — 1,574 - 
			 GC4 Southampton 13,737 — 13,737 — — — 
			 GC4* North Oxford 15,970 — 15,970 — — — 
			 GC4* Thames Valley (Milton Keynes) 8,292 260 4,185 — — — 
			 GC4 Thames Valley (Reading) 5,935 28 3,024 — — — 
			 GC5E Nottingham 110,683 29,556 10,481 10,634 704 4,452 
			 GC5W Cheshire and Merseyside 24,817 — 24,817 — — — 
			 GC5W Kidderminster 9,000 — 8,355 645 — — 
			 GC6 Maidstone 55,117 4,356 3,560 — — — 
			 GC7 North East London 56,030 1,580 15,495 — 8,040 9,415 
			 GC8 Brighton 26,438 141 26,297 — — — 
			 GC8 Havant — — — — — — 
			 GC8* Medway 19,770 400 6,235 — — — 
			 GC8 Portsmouth 34,218 4,243 4,854 — 8,265 — 
			 GC8 Wycombe — — — — — — 
			 OC123 Ophthalmic Chain 44,735 — — — 44,735 — 
			 
			  Contractual total 719,627 63,900 243,367 17,766 106,592 33,040 
			  ISTC utilisation to date — — — — — — 
		
	
	
		
			Total contracted procedures broken down by health resource group (HRG) chapter 
			  Contract  Location  Thoracic procedures  Digestive system  Urology  Gynaecology 
			 LP2 Bradford — 10,567 4,168 3,175 
			 LP3 Burton 109 5,405 11,631 2,853 
			 LP4 Trent and South Yorkshire — — — — 
			 LP5 Daventry — 242 — — 
			 LP7 Shepton Mallet — 20,000 — — 
			 LP8 Greater Manchester — 3,267 796 — 
			 LP9 Plymouth — — — — 
			 GC4* East Cornwall — 14,984 182 3,926 
			 GC4 East Lincolnshire — 2,392 590 - 
			 GC4 North East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire — 436 — — 
			 GC4 Northumberland, Tyne and Wear — 7,330 — — 
			 GC4 West Lincolnshire — 1,464 1,166 — 
			 GC4 Southampton — — — — 
			 GC4* North Oxford — — — — 
			 GC4* Thames Valley (Milton Keynes) — 3,384 321 142 
			 GC4 Thames Valley (Reading) — 2,141 271 471 
			 GC5E Nottingham 1,274 40,332 203 13,048 
			 GC5W Cheshire and Merseyside — — — — 
			 GC5W Kidderminster — — — — 
			 GC6 Maidstone 689 36,862 248 9,402 
			 GC7 North East London — 5,590 15,910 — 
			 GC8 Brighton — — — — 
			 GC8 Havant — — — — 
			 GC8* Medway — 6,065 7,070 — 
			 GC8 Portsmouth — 16,856 — — 
			 GC8 Wycombe — — — — 
			 OC123 Ophthalmic Chain — — — — 
			   
			  Contractual total 2,072 177,317 42,555 33,017 
			  ISTC utilisation to date — — — — 
			  Notes: 1. The total contract value represents the estimated nominal value at the time of signing, calculated in accordance with an estimate of the inflation index as specified in each contract. 2. The contracted activity is indicative only and can vary significantly from actual activity through substitution of higher or lower value procedures across the contract term. 3. Utilisation represents the per cent. value of the contract which has been utilised from contract commencement to the end of September 2007-08. 4. Utilisation per cent. may change following contract reconciliation which occurs at the end of each contract quarter and year. 5. All information provided has been based on the most up to date information at the time of submission. 6. The specialties are referenced to HRG Chapter. "General Surgery" includes HRG chapters E, G, J, K, P, Q and S. HRG information is available at: www.ic.nhs.uk/casemix. 7. This information is expected to be updated on an annual basis. 8. The Department works with sponsors and providers to ensure optimum utilisation of the contracts. This includes changing the case mix to respond to local need and working with providers and primary care trusts to recover previous under-utilised activity where possible. * In addition to the work we are doing across all ISTCs to improve utilisation we are also taking the following action:  Bodmin NHS Treatment Centre DH is agreeing a contract change to allow the ISTC to treat patients needing diagnostic endoscopies to achieve a two week wait in cancer referrals The provider (Capio) is targeting GPs with a marketing campaign to improve direct referrals  Norton DH is negotiating with the provider to relax the additionality clause so that local NHS surgeons can work in the ISTC "out of hours" Introducing outreach clinics in nearby towns to improve direct referrals from GPs DH is negotiating to sell unused activity to neighbouring PCTs and adjacent SHA  Blakelands There have been referrals issues in this ISTC but DH agreed a recovery plan and this is now resolved. Utilisation has been averaging 95 per cent. since February 2007  Medway This contract suffered from the turbulence of structural changes in the PCTs, but these are now resolved and utilisation is showing improvement The provider (Mercury) was taken over by Care UK recently and has been negotiating a range of new services which will improve utilisation in the new year The sponsor PCT is negotiating to sell unused activity to neighbouring PCTs 9. If you have any questions relating to this release of information please contact the Department of Health Newsdesk on 0207 210 5221 or for general enquiries phone 0207 210 4850.

Cambridgeshire Probation Service

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many individuals were accommodated in the Peterborough city council area under the auspices of the Cambridgeshire Probation Service MAPPA arrangements at  (a) level 1,  (b) level 2 and  (c) level 3 as at 31 December in each year since 2001.

Maria Eagle: The available data is not collated by council area or by parliamentary constituency. Data on offenders in the three levels of the multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA) are collated geographically by MAPPA area. MAPPA areas are coterminous with police force and probation areas. This data is published in (MAPPA) annual reports which are available in the House Libraries and at:
	http://www.probation.justice.gov.uk/output/page30.asp
	The Peterborough city council area is not coterminous with any area but is covered by the data relating to Cambridgeshire area as published in its MAPPA annual report. MAPPA data is collected on 31 March each year, for the period covering the previous year.
	Figures relating to MAPPA level 3 were not collected until the period covering 2002-03; figures relating to other MAPPA levels were not collected separately until 2004-05.
	
		
			  Cambridgeshire MAPPA statistics (broken down by level/year) 
			   2002-03  2003-04  2004-05  2005-06  2006-07 
			  (a) Level 1 n/a n/a 460 585 561 
			  (b) Level 2 n/a n/a 95 113 160 
			  (c) Level 3 48 2 3 4 4 
			 Total of offenders (1)732 (1)549 558 702 725 
			 (1) Although level 1 and 2 data was not collected, figures on offenders were collected via MAPPA Category during 2002-03 and 2003-04.

Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service: Data Protection

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  if he will make a statement on the action progressed against the United Kingdom by the European Union for failing to implement European Directive 95/46/EU on the basis that there is no lex forum for a Children and Family Courts Advisory Support Service report to be rectified; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what mechanisms exist to allow litigants to correct inaccuracies in a Children and Family Courts Advisory Support Service report where a family court judge does not order rectification and assertion remains disputed; and if he will make a statement;
	(3)  what assessment he has made of the impact of European Directive 95/46/EU on the ability of an individual to correct inaccurate information contained within a Children and Family Courts Advisory Support Service report; and if he will make a statement.

Kevin Brennan: I have been asked to reply.
	It is the practice of Cafcass to ensure that the parties to proceedings in which a Cafcass officer has been appointed have access to the Cafcass report before it is presented to the court. Where factual inaccuracies are brought to the attention of the Cafcass officer, the correct information is included in the report and the error noted in the file. It is also the case that differences of opinion or judgment are routinely reflected in Cafcass reports. In addition, concerns about the factual accuracy or other aspects of the report (for example, the extent of the inquiries, the opinions expressed in it or matters disputed by the parties) may be raised in court during the course of the proceedings. It is for the court to make findings of fact, based on the evidence before it, including the contents of the Cafcass report, and to determine the outcome of applications based on those findings. Cafcass' records include details of the findings and determinations made by the courts.
	Compliance with Article 22 of Directive 95/46/EC is achieved through the Data Protection Act 1998 section 14(1), under the terms of which a data subject can apply to court for rectification, blocking, erasure or destruction of personal data relating to him or her. If the personal data are inaccurate, the court can make an order not only in relation to those data but also any other personal data relating to the applicant containing an expression of opinion which appears to the court to be based on the inaccurate data.

Departmental Public Expenditure

Oliver Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the Winter Supplementary Estimates (HC 29), if he will break down his Department's  (a) main estimate and  (b) winter supplementary estimate provision by subhead in (i) near cash and (ii) non-cash terms.

Maria Eagle: Near-cash and non-cash are essentially used as departmental expenditure limit (DEL) budgetary control concepts and are not specifically identified with voted resources in estimates. However, we have been able to break down net total resources for each section in the 'Part II: Subhead' detail table of our main and winter supplementary estimates as follows:
	
		
			  £000 
			  Section  Main estimate  Winter supplementary estimate 
			  Spending in (voted) DEL  Near- cash  Non-cash  Total  Near- cash  Non-cash  Total 
			 Headquarters and Associated Offices 414,473 17,994 432,467 544,024 407,532 951,556 
			 Judicial Pension Administration 12 — 12 12 — 12 
			 HM Courts Service 705,090 256,040 961,130 745,741 236,583 982,324 
			 Office of the Public Guardian and Court of Protection -1,000 2,100 1,100 -973 2,100 1,127 
			 Costs from Central Funds 45,000 — 45,000 5,000 40,000 45,000 
			 Tribunals Service 293,942 5,680 299,622 297,249 5,680 302,929 
			 Princess of Wales Inquest 515 — 515 370 — 370 
			 Criminal Justice Reform — — — 117,379 15,865 133,244 
			 National Offender Management Service HQ — — — 647,729 390,383 1,038,112 
			 Prisons Private Sector — — — 224,309 23,720 248,029 
			 Prisons Public Sector — — — 2,008,902 27,100 2,036,002 
			 Probation HQ — — — 57,251 457 57,708 
			 Total RfRl only 1,458,032 281,814 1,739,846 4,646,993 1,149,420 5,796,413 
		
	
	The following table relates to cash grants to the relevant bodies.
	
		
			  £000 
			  Non-budget  Main estimate  Winter supplementary estimate 
			 Legal Service Commission 116,800 121,978 
			 Criminal Defence Service 1,172,300 1,153,246 
			 Community Legal Service 860,000 896,354 
			 Information Commissioner's Office 4,999 5,000 
			 Judicial Appointments Commission 5,700 7,130 
			 Parole Board — 7,789 
			 National Probation Service (Local area boards) — 881,090 
			 Youth Justice Boards — 448,881 
			 Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority — 223,789 
			 Criminal Cases Review Commission — 6,815 
			 Loan Charges — 2,190 
			 Total grant 2,159,799 3,754,262 
		
	
	In addition, the Department was provided £2,000 (000s) in capital grants to local authorities in the winter supplementary estimate. Capital grants are treated as resource in the estimate and capital in terms of departmental expenditure limit (DEL).
	In line with the creation of the Ministry of Justice and due to the machinery of government changes, a transfer of a number of business areas with funding from the Home Office took affect in the winter supplementary estimate.

Law Society: Complaints

Jonathan Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether he is investigating complaints made to the Law Society's Legal Complaints Service by miners and their families relating to solicitors making inappropriate deductions from miners' compensation awards, with reference to the Legal Services Complaints Commissioner's report Investigation into the Handling of Coal Health Compensation Schemes Complaints by the Legal Complaints Service and Solicitors Regulation Authority, dated 15 January 2008; whether he plans to take other steps in response to that report; and if he will make a statement.

Bridget Prentice: The legal profession is independent and as such complaints about solicitors are a matter for the Law Society rather than Government. However the Government believe that it is important that miners who complain to the Law Society about their claims under the Coal Health Compensation Scheme get the level of service and compensation that they deserve. The Government therefore seek regular updates from the Law Society to ensure that progress is being made in continually improving the service, and are awaiting a detailed response from the Law Society to the LSCC Special Report.
	The Government have legislated in the Legal Services Act 2007 to create an independent Office for Legal Complaints which will remove complaints handling from the legal professional bodies. It will also enable approved regulators to deal more effectively with cases of widespread wrongdoing in the future.

Law Society: Complaints

Jonathan Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps are being taken to  (a) retrain Legal Complaints Service caseworkers on the various options open to miners and  (b) assess the financial implications of each option with reference to the Legal Services Complaints Commissioner's report Investigation into the Handling of Coal Health Compensation Schemes Complaints by the Legal Complaints Service and Solicitors Regulation Authority, of 15 January 2008.

Bridget Prentice: The legal profession is independent and as such complaints about solicitors are a matter for the Law Society rather than Government. The Legal Complaints Service has informed the Ministry of Justice that its staff receive regular ongoing training taking into account feedback from all quarters including the LSCC. The LCS is currently investigating the financial implications of case handling options.
	The Government seek regular updates from the Law Society to ensure that progress is being made in continually improving the service, and are awaiting a detailed response from the Law Society to the LSCC Special Report.
	The Government have legislated in the Legal Services Act 2007 to create an independent Office for Legal Complaints which will remove complaints handling from the legal professional bodies. They will also enable approved regulators to deal more effectively with cases of widespread wrongdoing in the future.

Law Society: Complaints

Jonathan Djanogly: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will establish an investigation into the payments made between solicitors as identified in the Legal Services Complaints Commissioner's recent report on the handling of Coal Health Compensation Schemes and the trades unions which referred cases to them.

Bridget Prentice: The legal profession is independent and as such complaints about solicitors' conduct are a matter for the Law Society rather than Government.
	The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has authorised investigations into 60 firms of solicitors; 20 firms have been referred to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal and the SRA has won the first three disciplinary cases heard there.

Ministry of Justice

Neil Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many staff in his Department are working on the central management of change programme  (a) in London and  (b) in each region.

Maria Eagle: A small central team of 13 staff full-time equivalents work in the Department's Centre of Excellence for Programme Management. Among their responsibilities is the management of the Department's change portfolio of programmes and projects. Each of the Department's agencies and business units are responsible for development and delivery of their own change programmes. Information on the number of people engaged on the management of change is not held centrally within the Department and could not be obtained without disproportionate cost. This is because the information is unlikely to be available locally as it is not required for normal day to day operations and change activities are often dispersed nationally across the business units.

National Offender Management Information System

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how the non roll out of C-NOMIS to the Probation Service will affect  (a) shared information in real time,  (b) risk management,  (c) managed sentencing and rehabilitation and  (d) efficiency.

David Hanson: The information requested is as follows:
	 (a) Information will not be shared in real-time. However, the proposed data sharing system will update key offender information from HMPS and NFS systems on a daily basis and information will be a maximum of 24 hours out of date. In addition, OASys will also provide, for the first time, a single national database of offenders who fall within the agreed scope of offender management.
	 (b) As now, risk management of offenders is managed through the OASys and e-OASys systems in HMPS and NFS and is not affected by the constrained implementation of C-NOMIS to HMPS only.
	 (c) Managed sentencing and rehabilitation "across the gate" will continue to be done through the agreed offender management processes, which will be supported by the projects in the NOMIS programme.
	 (d) There will be efficiencies for probation from the projects in the NOMIS programme.

National Offender Management Information System

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many estimated individual offender records relating to offenders held or under supervision by the National Offender Management Service will be on the C-NOMIS system in each of the next 10 years.

David Hanson: As a result of the changes in the newly revised and deliverable NOMIS programme, which will see the C-NOMIS continuing to be rolled-out into public prisons but not probation areas, the estimated number of individual offender records to be held on C-NOMIS is currently under review. However, officials are committed to ensuring there will always be sufficient capacity in C-NOMIS to ensure the successful running of the system.

National Offender Management Service

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what procedures are being put in place for liaison between probation and prison staff on the end-to-end management of individual offenders.

David Hanson: A range of procedures have been put in place to support the liaison between probation and prison staff. Standards for offender management, which cover both custody and community, have been set. Joint training for the implementation has been provided, common forms have been issued, and single points of contact have been established. All of these measures are designed to ensure good information exchange and liaison between prison and probation staff. Full connectivity of the OASys assessment system has been established between probation services and prisons. This enables the offender manager to adopt a joint approach with prison staff to assessment and sentence planning.
	The implementation of end-to-end offender management is overseen by regional implementation groups in all nine regions in England and in Wales. These are composed of strategic and operational managers from prisons and probation, and representatives from regional offender managers' offices.

National Offender Management Service

John McDonnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice whether it is expected that the end-to-end management of offenders will be available for all persons placed on supervision.

David Hanson: Offender Management is being implemented in phases with all offenders on community orders and licences and offenders in custody assessed as high/very high risk of serious harm or classified as "Prolific or Other Priority" serving a determinate sentence of 12 months or more, already covered. Phase 3 began in January 2008 and extended offender management to offenders serving an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP).

Prison Sentences

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what average length of sentence had been served by each of those serving life sentences who were released from prison in each year since 2000; and if he will make a statement.

David Hanson: Information on the average time served by first released lifer prisoners from all prison establishments in England and Wales in each year since 2000 can be found in the following table:
	
		
			  Mean time served by lifers released from prison on first release in England and Wales 2000-06 
			   Mean time served (in years) 
			 2000 13 
			 2001 13 
			 2002 14 
			 2003 15 
			 2004 14 
			 2005 14 
			 2006 14 
			  Note: Table taken from table 10.5 of Offender Management Caseload Statistics 2006 http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/prisonandprobation.htm 
		
	
	If released, life sentence prisoners are on licence for the rest of their lives and liable to recall at any time.
	These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

Prison Staff: Crimes of Violence

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many knife attacks were made on prison staff by prisoners in prisons in 2007.

Maria Eagle: The information requested is set out in the table and subject to important qualifications. The Prison Service Incident Reporting System processes high volumes of data which are constantly being updated. The numbers provide a good indication of overall numbers but should not be interpreted as absolute. There is a slight lag in reporting which means that the provisional number mentioned here will rise a little in the coming months. Assault information is recorded at establishment level in four categories: Prisoner on Prisoner, Prisoner on Officer, Prisoner on Other and Other. Recording of assaults on prison officers sometimes includes assaults on other prison staff.
	The use of weapons is also recorded at establishment level. Weapons which function as knives are usually manufactured/assembled by prisoners and these artefacts are sometimes also categorised as sharp instruments.
	
		
			  Type of weapon  Prisoner on Officer 
			 Knives/Blades 17 
			 Sharp Instruments 3 
			 2007 total 20 
			  Note: This table does not include data from CNOMIS (offender management information system) sites where data was not available at time of compilation.

Prison Staff: Injuries

Nigel Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many injuries were reported as sustained by prison staff whilst they were off-duty but deemed to be related to the office they held in 2007; and if he will make a statement.

Maria Eagle: The Prison Service does not collect this information centrally and it can be obtained only at disproportionate costs. Any accidents or incidents that result in injury at or in connection with work are recorded but not those that occur whilst staff are off-duty. In order to obtain this information it would be necessary to ask every member of staff across the prison estate. Staff may not wish to disclose injuries received while off-duty as a result of the office they hold.

Prisoners Transfers

Elfyn Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice by what means his Department ensures that transfers of prisoners to the open estate comply with Prison Service Instruction PS I17/2007.

Maria Eagle: Prison Service Instruction (PSI) 17/2007, which has been replaced by PSI 46/2007, requires prison governors and directors of contracted prisons) to put in place arrangements to conduct categorisation reviews at six monthly intervals for all prisoners in the last 30 months of their sentence. In closed prisons, categorisation reviews must be carried out following the successful completion of any period of release on temporary licence.
	Governors (and directors of contracted prisons) must ensure that prisoners are only excluded from allocation to open conditions for reasons that are consistent with the normal categorisation and risk assessment process.
	Women prisoners are included in these arrangements. However, prisoners under 18 are not covered by this instruction and will continue to be placed by the Youth Justice Board.
	Compliance with these mandatory actions is managed via the operational line. The categorisation and allocation process is also subject to external audit procedures.

Prisoners Transfers

Jennifer Willott: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many transfers of high risk offenders from a  (a) category A and  (b) category B prison to open prisons there were in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement.

David Hanson: Information on the transfer of prisoners within the prison estate of establishments within England and Wales is not held centrally and to collect it would require extensive manual inspection of records.
	Prisoners are assessed objectively in a process looking at all aspects of their offending behaviour, actions they have taken to reduce their likelihood of reoffending and the risk they pose to the public. They are placed in the lowest security category consistent with their assessed risk. Only prisoners placed in the lowest security category (D) may be allocated to open conditions.

Prisoners: Protest

Henry Bellingham: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the incidence of dirty protests at each prison establishment in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement.

Maria Eagle: A dirty protest is not included in the list of incidents that must be reported to the national operations unit at Prison Service headquarters. Information on the number of dirty protests that takes place is not held centrally and could be obtained by contacting each prison only at a disproportionate cost.

Prisons

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what regulations there are on prison  (a) construction,  (b) location and  (c) specifications.

David Hanson: The construction of prison buildings is subject to the same regulations as other building construction which includes Building Regulations where appropriate, Health and Safety and Fire Regulations and various regulations relating to the provision of utility services. Government policies relating to energy and sustainable development apply including the requirement to achieve the highest BREEAM rating of excellent for energy efficiency for each building. Design, Security and Technical specifications and standards produced by NOMS also apply. A proposal to locate and build a new prison on a particular site would be subject to planning procedures. These procedures also apply to the provision of a new building in an existing prison.

Probation Officers

Neil Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will estimate what percentage of  (a) probation officer and  (b) probation service officer time was spent in direct contact with offenders in each of the last 10 years.

Maria Eagle: All probation staff in the NFS are employed by the relevant Probation Board who are responsible for managing workload allocation. It is therefore not possible to provide information at this level. Information is however collected on the number of staff employed in offender management roles.
	The following table shows the number of staff working in an offender management role from 2003 onwards. Data prior to 2003 were collated by a different source and were incomplete in some categories. They are therefore not directly comparable with the figures collected since that time.
	
		
			  Role  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  Increase (2003-07) 
			 Number of staff in offender management role 17,551.20 17,771.71 18,630.41 19,155.90 18,706.47 — 
			 Percentage 91.79 91.03 90.69 89.81 89.82 6.58 
			
			 Number of staff in other roles 1,570.60 1,751.27 1,911.65 2,173.08 2120.86 — 
			 Percentage 8.21 8.97 9.37 10.19 10.18 35.04 
			
			 Total number of staff 19,121.80 19,522.98 20,542.06 21,328.98 20,827.33 — 
			 Percentage 100 100 100 100 100 8.92

Probation: Finance

Neil Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much of the money budgeted for the end-to-end offender management roll-out was allocated to each probation area in 2007-08; and how that allocation was decided.

David Hanson: A total of £3.7 million was distributed to probation areas in 2007-08 to cover the costs of phases 2 and 3 of the roll-out of end-to-end offender management in those years. Phase 2, which began in November 2006, was the first phase to cross the custody/community boundary and covers high risk of harm and Prolific Offenders. Phase 3 began in January 2008 and covers offenders serving an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection.
	The costs are estimated using a model developed in NOMS by staff with experience of probation processes, which has been subject of consultation with probation managers. The national figure as calculated using the model was distributed to probation areas using a well established formula, whose main component is the population in the probation area in question. The actual sums distributed are shown in the following table:
	
		
			  Offender management funding 
			  Probation area  Total 2007-08 (£ million) 
			 Avon and Somerset 0.083 
			 Bedfordshire 0.038 
			 Cambridgeshire 0.044 
			 Cheshire 0.062 
			 Cumbria 0.037 
			 Derbyshire 0.063 
			 Devon and Cornwall 0.090 
			 Dorset 0.035 
			 Durham 0.048 
			 Essex 0.086 
			 Gloucestershire 0.032 
			 Hampshire 0.108 
			 Hertfordshire 0.052 
			 Humberside 0.075 
			 Kent 0.097 
			 Lancashire 0.104 
			 Leicestershire 0.064 
			 Lincolnshire 0.042 
			 Norfolk 0.050 
			 Northamptonshire 0.042 
			 North Yorkshire 0.044 
			 Nottinghamshire 0.083 
			 Staffordshire 0.071 
			 Suffolk 0.041 
			 Surrey 0.040 
			 Sussex 0.077 
			 Teesside 0.055 
			 Thames Valley 0.104 
			 Warwickshire 0.029 
			 West Mercia 0.068 
			 Wiltshire 0.037 
			 Greater Manchester 0.210 
			 Merseyside 0.126 
			 Northumbria 0.126 
			 South Yorkshire 0.107 
			 West Midlands 0.241 
			 West Yorkshire 0.173 
			 London 0.568 
			 Dyfed-Powys 0.037 
			 Gwent 0.051 
			 North Wales 0.051 
			 South Wales 0.108 
			 Total 3.699

Probation: Northumbria

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the effect of budget reductions on the support provided to offenders as a result of budget cuts in the Northumbria probation area.

Maria Eagle: Northumbria probation area in conjunction with the regional offender manager for the North East will determine the quantity and quality of services to be provided in the forthcoming year. This will be through service level agreements between the board and the regional offender manager. Northumbria's budget will increase from £25,484 million to £25,995 million between 2007-08 and 2008-09 (2.01 per cent.). In addition, their three year corporate plan includes a programme of cash savings of up to £1.3 million from their non staffing budget.

Probation: Northumbria

David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will take steps to prevent reductions in the budget for Inventory of Offenders programmes in the Northumbria probation area.

Maria Eagle: Any reduction in budget for Inventory of Offenders programmes in the Northumbria area will be with agreement with the regional offender manager (North East), through service level agreements and the board will look to deliver against the targets set both nationally and through the regional offender manager. Northumbria's budget will increase from £25,484 million to £25,995 million between 2007-08 and 2008-09 (2.01 per cent.). In addition, their three year corporate plan includes a programme of cash savings of up to £1.3 million from their non staffing budget.

Public Appointments

Theresa May: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what additional responsibilities the hon. Member for Liverpool, Garston has taken up since her appointment as Ministerial Champion for Women and Criminal Justice.

Maria Eagle: As Ministerial Champion for Women and Criminal Justice matters, I lead on implementation of the commitments made in the Government's response to the Corston report. I will ensure that the actions to address issues for women are given the necessary priority and that commitments are delivered across Departments. I have convened a ministerial sub-group which met for the first time on 23 January 2008 and will meet on a monthly basis and drive forward the cross-departmental work that will be key to successful delivery. This sub-group will report to the Reducing Re-offending Inter-Ministerial Group as the governing body.

Reoffenders

Nick Herbert: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice 
	(1)  what proportion of those entering prisons in England and Wales to serve a custodial sentence in 2006 had served a custodial sentence previously;
	(2)  what percentage of those given a custodial sentence had  (a) one,  (b) two and  (c) three or more previous community sentences in each of the last three years.

Jack Straw: The information requested is not available in this form. In previous years information has been published annually in Sentencing Statistics showing the average number of previous convictions/cautions by type of current sentence; the most recently published is for 2005.
	My Department are currently conducting a review of the data and methods used to compile these figures and it is hoped that figures for 2006 and revised figures for earlier years will be published on the MoJ website later this year.

Democratic Republic of Congo

Judy Mallaber: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what support the UK will provide for the implementation of the Kivu peace accord and the ending of conflict in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo.

Gareth Thomas: DFID is already providing significant humanitarian and security and justice sector support which will help with the implementation of the peace accord in Kivu. Further support is being considered.

The Maghreb

Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what discussions he has had with EU colleagues on ways of strengthening civil society in the countries of the Maghreb.

Shahid Malik: I have not had direct discussions with EU counterparts about strengthening Maghreb civil society. I am aware of my hon. Friend's considerable and active interest in the region. DFID supports the Maghreb countries through significant multilateral contributions—support to Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco amounted to over £40 million in 2005. And working closely with the FCO, we encourage the European Commission to engage civil society in its policies and programmes.

Elections

Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what steps he is taking to promote free and fair elections in developing countries.

Gareth Thomas: We have and will continue to provide support to promote free and fair elections in a range of developing countries including, for example, the £8 million to support the 2007 successful elections in Sierra Leone. The Department also provided £25 million to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) elections during 2006-07—our largest contribution to date to a national election—and £6 million to support the last elections in Nigeria. We are already providing support for forthcoming elections in Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, Sudan and Malawi.

Pakistan

Madeleine Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what projects his Department is undertaking with local government in Pakistan.

Shahid Malik: DFID support for local government in Pakistan focuses on service delivery, capacity building and governance. Specific assistance is being provided to the provinces of Punjab and North West Frontier and to the federally administered tribal areas. In addition, support is being provided for national programmes to improve local capacity and the use of district funds and to increase citizen participation, especially women, in decision making processes. In total we have committed £84 million for these programmes.

Africa

David Taylor: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent representations he has received on the use of UK development funds in the poorest countries in Africa; and if he will make a statement.

Gareth Thomas: The Department for International Development receives a wide variety of representations on the use of UK development funds in poor African countries, including from African Governments, regional institutions, the International Financial Institutions, other donors, NGOs, the private sector, and members of the public. Assisting the poorest African countries is a priority of this Government as this is critical for achievement of the millennium development goals.

Overseas Aid

Michael Moore: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what  (a) country assistance and  (b) regional assistance plans his Department expects to (i) produce and (ii) renew in the next 18 months.

Douglas Alexander: DFID's country and regional plans are produced every three to five years, unless significant changes in the external environment, such as a major political change, necessitate an earlier or later review. They are mandatory for programmes over £20 million a year though can also be commissioned for smaller programmes in proportion to expenditure. In the next 18 months DFID currently expects to produce 19 country plans; eight in Asia (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Indonesia, Cambodia, India, Pakistan, Vietnam), nine in Africa (Mozambique, Malawi, Zambia, Kenya, Ghana, Ethiopia, DRC, Sudan, Rwanda) and two in the Middle East (Palestine and Yemen). These figures are based on current plans and may be subject to changes in country circumstances.

Pakistan: Education

Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what programmes he has co-financed in Pakistan to promote the education of women and girls since 2004.

Shahid Malik: DFID has co-financed programmes with UNDP, UNICEF and the World Bank to promote education of women and girls in Pakistan since 2004.
	£6 million was committed in 2006 to UNDP's Gender Support Programme (2006-11). This includes training of women in the garment industry, training of women councillors, and support to improve the way education sector budgets address gender issues.
	£3.5 million was committed in 2007 to UNICEF's Gender Education Policy Support Project which is supporting the development and promotion of policies that address the problem of gender disparity in Pakistan's education system.
	£0.7 million was also committed in 2007 to support a World Bank project to establish a National Education Assessment System that has significant gender components. DFID funds are helping to improve education policy by assessing gender differences in learning achievements in both primary and secondary education.

St. Helena: Airports

John Cummings: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what progress has been made on the building of an airport on St. Helena; and if he will make a statement.

Shahid Malik: We have received two bids which we are evaluating. We expect to reach a decision within the second quarter of the year.

Zambia: Floods

Mohammad Sarwar: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assistance his Department has offered to the Government of Zambia and neighbouring states to manage the consequences of recent flooding in the region.

Gillian Merron: In Zambia, an initial assessment in six districts in Southern Province shows that almost 4,500 houses have collapsed, and almost 3,500 additional households have been affected. The Zambia Government is indicating that it has the resources to respond to the needs in the assessed areas, with support from in-country private sector donations. It has already provided 15,000 mT of maize for response during 2007-08, and has released $3.5 million for the procurement of relief items such as tents, blankets and mosquito nets.
	In neighbouring Mozambique, DFID has provided some £97,000, through Save the Children, for the delivery of emergency water and sanitation to 10,000 affected people. The UN is also drawing on the Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF) for priority operations in the humanitarian response. DFID is the biggest contributor to the CERF having provided £40 million in 2008. The International Federation of the Red Cross (IFRC) launched a preliminary appeal for $7.3 million to address the immediate humanitarian needs of up to 150,000 people across the region. DFID is finalising its response to this appeal.
	Assessments of the situation by Government, UN and NGO agencies are ongoing and DFID continues to monitor the situation closely. We will respond as unmet humanitarian needs are identified.